On 25/01/2021 03:19, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Just to be really clear, the *purpose* of leftcopy is to discriminate
> against a group.
Nope. Company officers, ('the board'), shareholders, customers,
affiliates, subsidiary undertakings can all use leftcopy.
> As such, there is no waffling, no indecision, no wiggle room.Okay, so if a license had a restriction that disallowed bachelors who are also married from using the software, no matter what the philosophical consensus might be on the ontological status of bachelors who are also married, the fact that the license intends to discriminate against them (which is also discriminating against no one) then that would be grounds for non-compliance under the OSD? AFAICT, that's a terrible argument. > The leftcopy is not an Open Source license. Yes, but it looks as though the OSI won't get an opportunity to prove that either way because of some very esoteric ideas about corporations resembling human beings. > You *intend* it to not be Open Source. Assuming someone has bad faith intentions is frowned upon here: https://opensource.org/codeofconduct/licensing. Check yourself. _______________________________________________ The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address. License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
