Okay, I guess I see that. I didn't see it as entirely a case of moral positioning. In the example that I created, if I were a member of <ethnic group>, I would feel like I were not as welcome to use the software as others are. Moreover, depending on what exactly was said, I might also find it repulsive to propagate the message by redistributing the program, whether I am a member of <ethnic group> or not.
Thus it seemed to me that, when a licensor tries to discourage a person or group from using the software, it shouldn't matter whether they are trying to accomplish that through legal force or through insults and intimidation. However, I realize that argument must seem a little fuzzy, and perhaps a little too idealistic as well, for all of you lawyers :-). Thanks, Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Moen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I'm pretty sure the OSD is concerned solely with licences' > actual effect, not their attitude problems. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I will stop lurking for just a split second to say that I > agree that the OSD is not a moral code. -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
