On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 7:19 AM, Christofer C. Bell wrote: > I'd not be so quick to retract those comments! I agree it fails the > dissident test. One is not able to contribute anonymously. You must > identify the organization you are a part of (and what is an > "organization," anyway?). And what do you do if you're not part of an > organization? Are you required to identify yourself? > > If one must identify themselves a part of "freedom fighters, inc." > they open themselves to their changes being traced back to them along > with a flag on them saying, "I'm a freedom fighter." If they are not > part of an organization, but other "freedom fighter" organizations > are a part of the project, they become tied to those (perhaps, in the > eyes of the government) through their explicit association with the > project. > > I think this clause in the license absolutely fails the dissident test > because there is no way for someone to contribute anonymously, and, on > the face of it, no way to contribute without being a member of an > organization, a term the license fails to define.
The item in question doesn't say which name should be added, nor who the name should be revealed to. The modifier could add a pseudonym instead of the name they are known as by the government and or simply not distribute the program to anyone they do not trust. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6h6rzjym0pmq-gsqemhd691hquproqsnkf+yng+edv...@mail.gmail.com