Joachim Breitner dijo [Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 10:34:01PM +0200]: > > Trivially non-free (DFSG #6). Also, the word "evil" is far too > > subjective to be meaningful in a license. > > how about trivially free, since the sentence, as you say, is not > meaningful in a license and thus has no effect? :-)
If the program in question is terrible, as bad as it can be to solve any given program, and I malliciously recommend it to you (to make you waste your valuable time - Just to put an example, as you recently tempted me to lose time using an experimental feature in pidgin some days ago ;-) ), I would be in breach of the license. I do not think that complies with DFSG#6. In a more serious tone: «Evil» and «good» are two of the most problematic words ever. They can mean opposite things to different people (see all kind of religious or anti-clerical fanaticals). Legal documents must be as unambiguous as possible. Forbiding somebody to be "evil" equals putting everybody in a single moral schema. And that is evil. (Hence the license forbids the author form redistributing his own software under said license? Hmm... Shutup! I said this would be in a more serious tone!) -- Gunnar Wolf • gw...@gwolf.org • (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org