The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: next approach: new non-free/contrib policy

On Mon, 28 Jul 1997, Philip Hands wrote:

> Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> wrote:
> > It doesn't matter whether it's the license or some other legal fiction
> > that creates the restriction. It is the distribution restriction that
> > categorizes the package as non-free. The source of that restriction is
> > different in the case of non-us, but no less sufficient to make the
> > packages non-free. The other difference between the two is that we have
> > some hope of changing an author's idea of proper copyright, I see no hope
> > of changing the ignorant behavior of the government.
> 
> Absolute Drivel!

Thank you for your kind words ;-)

> 
> If what you say were true, some tin pot dictator could decide to outlaw 
> computer programs and thus move the entire distribution into non-free.
> 
No, we would only need to remove the distribution from any ftp servers in
that country. (This wouldn't be hard, since outlawing all software would
effectivly outlaw all ftp servers) This solution has been determined to be
unacceptable in the case of the petty dictatorship of the US government.
Removing all ftp servers from the US wasn't determined to be a helpful
solution.

> Please try to avoid ``USA == whole world'' thinking.
> 
Nothing in what I said either explicitly or implicitly declared the above
statement to have any relevance. Gene splicers don't make up the "whole
world" either, but software that can't be used by Gene splicers is not
considered to be Free Software. Neither should software that is restricted
from distribution by a national government. In addition, the US is not the
only backward government when it comes to restricting 'cryption software.
I know that, at least, France has more restrictive laws in this reguard
than even the US does.

My point was that a distribution restriction exists with respect to non-US
software that is at least as onerous as any of the other restrictions that
we consider make a particular piece of software "non-free".

Later,

Dwarf
-- 
_-_-_-_-_-_-                                          _-_-_-_-_-_-_-

aka   Dale Scheetz                   Phone:   1 (904) 656-9769
      Flexible Software              11000 McCrackin Road
      e-mail:  dwarf@polaris.net     Tallahassee, FL  32308

_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .