On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 07:26:59 -0500 Julie wrote: > I have never seen any actual evidence of the current version of > Chromium containing proprietary components. > It's an unreasonable standard to demand proof that programs are libre.
julie, that is like saying "i dont see any evidence on that new car that says: i do not belong to you" - would you then conclude that you can drive it home? - i think you would prefer to see the explicit evidence proving that you do in fact have the right to do that the default copy permissions for every copyrighted work is "none" - in order for that work be be set free, the author must very explicitly label it as such, and try their very best to ensure that their formal statement of permission follows along with any copies of it - because if that permission is missing, or difficult to locate or to comprehend, there is no reason to assume the work is freely distributable the burden of proof is not upon the one who claims that the default case applies, it is upon the one who claims that some special case applies i will say again though, that my main intention was not to make any claims neither for nor against this particular program; but to entice the guix devs to discuss it on the FSDG mailing list for the benefit of the others who are also interested
