Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > No, a license that doesn't follow the DFSG is non-free; a license that > fails the dissident test is merely not useful for someone who wants to > violate local law while obeying copyright law. > > The claim that protesting is a "field of endeavour", [...]
Why describe the dissident test as relying solely on the "field of endeavour" (DFSG 6) guideline? That's new and also seems like a strawman: I think that it's clear that protesting is a field, but I don't think identity-disclosure necessarily prevents protest. Contrary to my previous message http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/09/msg00263.html in the discussion http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.legal/22852 (and the unattributed stuff on wiki.d.o), the earliest claim that I've found about the dissident test is that being forced to disclose one's identity is an unacceptable cost, in http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/05/msg00057.html so a license that fails the dissident test is breaking DFSG 1, 3 and/or 5. FWIW, I don't think I've ever relied on the dissident test. Hope that helps, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
