Raul Miller writes: > On 1/27/06, Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There are non-malicious reasons for releasing software under completely > > proprietary licenses. Good intentions don't make a restriction more free. > > Nor do bad intentions make a restriction non-free. > > What makes a restriction non-free is that it prevents some free > use of the software.
There's little or no evidence that requiring creators of a derivative of some software to identify themselves would prevent a free use of the software. Does that mean the Dissident test is irrelevant? Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
