Re[2]: Free Software and Torpark

[Arrakis <arrakistor@xxxxxxxxx>]

Paolo,

Just because there are laws against murder doesn't mean that people
don't do it. However, the law does make it actionable if they do
commit murder.

Regards,
Arrakis

>> Let  us  not be ambigious about the "users" you are talking about. The
>> specific  "users"  you  are talking about are limited by definition to
>> only  be  the ones wanting to modify it to include malware/trojans, or
>> someone  trying  to  turn it into a commercial application, or an evil
>> government  that  does not abide by the universal declaration of human
>> rights.  Anyone  who  falls  under  one of those three definitions who
>> can't consider it free, I'm not concerned about. To _all_ other users,
>> it  is  free  and open source, and they can do what they want with it,
>> and modify and distribute it how they please.

> It just makes no sense to say "it's free except for..." if you intend 
> free as in freedom. It's the same kind of idea of those who think that
> "Tor should be working for everyone except for criminals...".

> About the "malware" problem, i just report this quote from the OS 
> Definition page on wikipedia:
> "Back in the 1980s, some software which was given away had license terms
> that specifically prohibited the police or military of the Government of
> South Africa from using the program because of objections to apartheid.
> While this is a laudable goal, it's not relevant to include it in a 
> software license. Beyond which, such organizations might simply ignore
> the restrictions anyway."

>> The  distinction you are attempting to make anti-thetical to security.
>> Somehow I just can't see my way clear to advocating modification of my
>> software  for the use of spyware and commercial competitors. I fail to
>> see  what  legitimate  interest  you  or  anyone  else have in keeping
>> software  from  being  legally  protected  against  having trojans and
>> malware inject into them, and still considering it free.

> What if the license was to block criminals from using the program? Would
> you still consider it free? What if the license was to block people that
> commited a crime in the past? What if the license was to block people 
> that are more likely to commit a crime for their personal psychological
> background?
> Would you still consider it "free"?

>> Once  again,  would  anyone else like to see Tor's license add that it
>> can't  be  modified  to  have malware, trojans, spyware, etc. injected
>> into it?

> No.

> Paolo