UNFREE: fails Desert Island test.
This is not relevant, because this test is not based on the DFSG so it
cannot make a license to be non-free.
This requirement all fails the dissident test.
Quote fom the faq:
a.. The Dissident test.
Consider a dissident in a totalitarian state who wishes to share a modified
bit of software with fellow dissidents, but does not wish to reveal the
identity of the modifier, or *directly reveal the modifications themselves*,
Ok so far it fails 2 of the three tests, and has a choice iof venue clause.
I have seen licenced dismissed because of a single one of those. So it is
fairly clear to me that it does not qualify as free.
It blatently fails DFSG 5, because the person modifying the software may not
have internet access for emailing the changes. (Think perhaps a developing
nation.)
Well if you argue that I will assert that it fails the OSD. It is not
technology neutral, because it mandates email, and use of the Domain name
system, either of which may cease existing before the copyright expires.
So it fails two tests, has a choice of venue clause, fails DFSG 5, and fails
OSD 10.
I think it is clearly non-free.
P.S. Technology neutrality should really be added to the DFSG.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
