GNU GPL and Open Source Definition

[Matthew Weigel]

On Monday, May 6, 2002, at 10:22  PM, David Johnson wrote:

> On Sunday 05 May 2002 03:41 am, Arnout Engelen wrote:
>
>> GNU GPL paragraph 8:
>> If the distribution and/or use of the Program is restricted in
>> certain countries either by patents or by copyrighted interfaces, the
>> original copyright holder who places the Program under this License
>> may add an explicit geographical distribution limitation excluding
>> those countries, so that distribution is permitted only in or among
>> countries not thus excluded.  In such case, this License incorporates
>> the limitation as if written in the body of this License.
>
> The GPL as normally used does not have any of these restrictions. 
> These copies
> of the GPL (and the software under them) fully comply with the 
> OSD. In the
> case that there would be a restriction added due to this clause, 
> then that
> particular instance of the GPL and the software would NOT be Open 
> Source.
> (neither would it be Free Software)

So, in your opinion, problems like Skylarov's current plight with 
the FBI are
*unavoidable* in open source and free software?

*Any* software under *any* free or open source license exposes its 
authors and
contributors to being arrested in foreign countries (and, 
hypothetically,
extradition)?

Discussion on a similar topic came up with the inability to 
disclaim warranty for,
e.g., medical software, and I don't recall anyone proclaiming so 
absolutely that
restrictions on field of endeavor to protect oneself from being 
thrown in jail for
writing software never meant to expose people to physical danger 
were so absolutely
*not* open source or free software.

I disagree :-)

weigel at libcom.com

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3