On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 12:21:38AM -0400, Marty wrote: > By protecting the authors' rights, same as the GPL. You must have > missed by main point.
You seem to be confused. The GPL is not primarily designed to protect the author's rights. It's designed to protect *user's* rights, which always come first. A complete prohibition of modification does not protect user's rights; on the contrary, it abolishes them. (Your argument would seem to mean that Qmail is free, because its complete prohibition of modification protects its author's rights.) > I'll be disappointed is nobody has come up with a better argument that > off-topic invariant sections can restrict "freedom." I'm quite confused as to how anyone can possibly claim that something which can't be modified at all is "free". The onus is always on the person placing restrictions on users to show that the restriction does not impede freedom. Restrictions are not Free by default; they must be proven, and the few people claiming invariant sections are "free" have so far utterly failed to do so. -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
