Eric, Could you explain where in the non-legally functional Persona non Grata Preamble that anyone is being "denied" use of the software? I'm not sure I see that. Shame, annoyed, socially discouraged perhaps but I don't see how it is "denied".
My horse and myself will be over here waiting for clarification. Eric On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 7:44 AM Eric S. Raymond <e...@thyrsus.com> wrote: > I reject the "Persona Non Grata" clause, and all other attempts at > so-called "ethical" open-source licensing, in the strongest possible > terms. To get entangled in this sort of thing would not merely > be against OSI's charter as expressed in the OSD, it would invite > second- and third-order effects that would be gravely harmful. > > This is really what I joined the list to say. The fairness-vs.-mission > issue I discussed in my previous post, though serious, probably > wouldn't have been enough to motivate me in itself. > > I initiated the founding of OSI so it could pursue and defend freedom. > Thomas Paine had an apposite quote: "He that would make his own > liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he > violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to > himself." > > Whatever hypothetical good might be done in individual cases by > denying the use of open-source code to putatively evil persons and > organizations would be swamped by the systemic harm from enabling > people to use open-source licenses in political vendettas. Because > such precedent, as Paine understood, always comes back to bite you; > there would be no end to the feuds, the divisiveness, and the erosion > of freedom if we went down that path. > > Clauses 5 and 6 are in the OSD in part for that reason, and approving > mechanisms to end-run them - such as the Persona Non Grata clause - > would be a direct and egregious violation of OSI's charter and > my intentions in founding OSI. Such clauses are not even a fit topic > for *discussion* here outside of a swift recognition that they are > out of bounds. > > With whatever moral authority I still have here, I say to all > advocates of soi-disant "ethical" licensing not just "No" but "To hell > with you *and* the horse you rode in on." > -- > <a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a> > > As the Founding Fathers knew well, a government that does not trust its > honest, > law-abiding, taxpaying citizens with the means of self-defense is not > itself > worthy of trust. Laws disarming honest citizens proclaim that the > government > is the master, not the servant, of the people. > -- Jeff Snyder > > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > License-discuss@lists.opensource.org > > http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org > -- Eric Schultz, Developer and FOSS Advocate wwahammy.com e...@wwahammy.com @wwahammy Pronouns: He/his/him
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
