> Even if DADVSI is passed, the case of Freenet remains debatable. In fact, 
> DADVSI says that it's forbidden to develop networks being explicitly designed 
> for illegal file sharing. As you can guess, this is stupid: How judges will 
> define if a network is designed for that or not ? It's even more true for 
> Freenet, as the main goal is the freedom of speech, and clearly not illegal 
> file sharing.

Thinking of it logically FileZilla client/server is more illegal then Freenet.

-- 
http://freedom.libsyn.com/   Voice of Freedom, Radical Podcast
http://freeselfdefence.info/ Self-defence wiki

"None of us are free until all of us are free."
                  ~ Mihail Bakunin

Reply via email to