Re: [directory-discuss] s/w that requires a middleman to liberate it -- is it free? (was: GNU R situation)

[Ineiev]

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 02:19:08PM +0100, Anonymous wrote:
> It's a disservice to users to
> create a mechanism that merely enables a non-free artifact to
> masquerade as a "free" one by riding on the weasel-wording that Ian
> Kelling and yourself propose as a workaround to free software.

Please note that this is not just Svetlana's and Ian's position,
it's shared by all people on this list who have spoken so far
except you, and it's also the position of the GNU project, which
has already been pointed out:
"The criterion for free software is not about who has “access” to the
program; the four essential freedoms concern what a user that has a
copy of the program is allowed to do with it."
[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html.en#Access]
(note "user that has a copy").

We do distinguish the freedom in use the package and conditions that
may apply to any particular channel of its distribution; you seem
to mix them. perhaps you could try to explain us why.

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature