On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 09:41:55PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > Maybe what needs to be done is draw a line *within* non-free, > and eliminate some of the more objectionable material. For example, > perhaps, we should stop distributing material which can't be distributed > to all users.
I should clarify that: I'm talking about non-commercial use licenses. As near as I can tell, from reading 17 USC, [a] a non-commercial use clause in a copyright is an invalid clause, or [b] it's a clause which restricts distribution, not use. Once you have a legal copy of a piece of software you're allowed to do anything you want with it except make more copies and redistribute them. But a judge might possibly interepret distribution of software with a non-commercial use clause to a commercial institution as a violation of the copyright. Anyways, someone objected to that kind of software on the grounds that it was discriminatory, and so I picked it as an example of something we maybe shouldn't be distributing. [And, I picked stuff licensed under RMS's GFDL as an example of something we maybe should be distributing.] -- Raul
