[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> this part just went full-circle back to a few weeks ago > "emulators and other hosts of foreign applications" > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2023-06/msg00088.html You're focusing on abstract classifications of programs, but that's not what this issue is about. This issue is not about distinguishing emulators from interpreters, or any such classification of programs. Because it is not about making rules to apply to those classifications. It is not about rigid rules at all. The issue here is: given a specific free program that can (occssionally, or theoretically) be used to run some free software, but in practice is nearly always used to run nonfree software, which of these approaches should we choose about that program? Which All of these approaches are legitimate and ethical according to our philosophy. But each can be more or less beneficial to the cause. 1. treat it like any other free program -- pay it no special attention. 2. Urge free distros to reject it, becsuse in practice distributing it to users only legitimizes the nonfree programs that depend on it. 3. Tell free distros to reject it, for that same reason. 4. Tell free distros they can redistribute it provided they remove all information about finding the nonfree programs it can run. Right now we are thinking about the ScummVM case. I do NOT expect we will want to treat all such cases alike. I expect that in thinking about various cases, we will find reasons for treating various cases in various ways. > as i noted earlier, it depends how "generically" they are viewed - in the > strictest sense, it would apply to every runtime and language interpreter, such > as java, dotnet, python, gnu-smalltalk, etc - anything which can be > characterized as a VM I don't think that "being a VM" is a pertinent factor anyway. even those which would be the safest to recommend, such as QEMU, can run non-free software as well as anything That is too terse for me to follow. What _exactly_ is the stance you are arguing against? And plesae state the facts that you're basing your argument on, because I know very little about QEMU. The one thing I can is that (1) any platform for running software can run nonfree software, and therefore (2) the fact that platform P can run nonfree software is not pertinent to any judgments about P. -- Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org) Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org) Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
