[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Fsuk-manchester] HPL

From: Pete Morris
Subject: RE: [Fsuk-manchester] HPL
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 09:11:52 +0100

Is it a joke/proof-of-concept licence, or does it have more political 
intentions (i.e. preventing shared libraries being used in the firmware of 
weapons systems etc.)? If the latter, what about non-lethal weapons? How do you 
define "harm" -- is RSI caused by coding too much considered "harm"?

All seems a bit vague to me.


-----Original Message-----
From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of Dave Page
Sent: 21 May 2010 23:03
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: [Fsuk-manchester] HPL

On Friday 21 May 2010 22:22:23 Luke Taylor wrote:

> Essentially it is BSD but with the clause that you may not use the software
> to harm animals or humans. (Surely this restriction makes the software
> non-free?)

It amuses me that PETA hasn't realised that humans *are* animals.

This is clearly a non-free software license since it's in direct violation of
freedom 0 (the freedom to run the software for any purpose)...

Dave Page <address@hidden>
Jabber: address@hidden

Fsuk-manchester mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]