At 01:23 AM 8/2/99 -0400, Mike Goldman wrote: >Is a license DFSG-non-free if it has restrictions against certain uses to which >the author is deeply morally opposed, and where such uses are clearly injurious >to person or property (and not merely a "religious" objection on the part of the >licensor)? Are all activities legitimate "fields of endeavor"?
Not merely a "religious" objection? Why should your objection to injuring persons & property be treated any different from a Jew's objection to his code being used for non-kosher foods or an animal right's person's objection to his code being used to hurt or imprison animals, or a Communist's objection to his code being used to support capitalist society? (The Communist would certainly argue that capitalist society has far more negative and long term effects then the immediate things you're worried about.) If one of those is free, why shouldn't all of them be? >Must an author permit such military use for a license to be DFSG-free? Yes. Just like the author of Crafty had to allow people to use it in tournaments for it to be free, which he found particularly immoral. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] (alternately [EMAIL PROTECTED]) "I would weep, but my tears have been stolen; I would shout, but my voice has been taken. Thus, I write." - Tragic Poet
