On 13.05.2014 19:19, Nick wrote:
>> Peaceful Open Source License
>
> 1) It's incompatible with most free software licenses. [0]
> 2) Copyright law is the wrong place to do this; it covers
> distribution - if I take your mail client, load it onto a missile,
> and fire the missile, I'm not redistributing your code, so the terms
> of the license don't kick in. Well, maybe I am, but only if the
> missile is very ineffective ;)
>
> Domain restrictive licensing is a bad idea even if it didn't make
> software non-free (it does). Even for domains that you definitely
> disagree with. Debian probably has lots written about that, if not
> you should be able to find convincing arguments against it plenty of
> places. It's one of those things that sounds like a good idea at
> first glance, but really isn't.
>
> 0. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#NoMilitary
>
Thank you for showing me the link(FSF) and the notice to read the
mailing list of Debian. Now i know why the Peaceful Open Source License
isn't used anywhere.
Received on Tue May 13 2014 - 20:18:14 CEST