Antiwar License

[Rodrigo Barbosa]

On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 06:48:31PM -0800, Sergey Goldgaber wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 05:54:30PM -0800, Sergey Goldgaber wrote:
> > > However, INAL, and was wondering if any of the more experienced
> > > people on this list think this is a feasable idea, or perhaps
> > > could even suggest some possible wordings that such a license
> > > could use.
> > Would it really matter ? Or would the militaries just declare
> > national security is involved, and then ignore the license ?
> Of course it wouldn't _really_ matter.  The judicial branch has often
> acted as the valiant defender of corporate and government interests
> against the interest of the individual.  And it's not like a lawsuit
> against the US government on this point would be successful anyway.
> However, the license may well dissuade at least some government
> contractors from using the software.  And if it indirectly helps to
> keep even one person from getting killed it'll be worth it.
> Furthermore, I think it is perfectly realistic that the adoption of
> such a license as a political statement will catch on, and that would
> be very positive, even if it achieves nothing legally.

Wouldn't it be wiser to elect non-beligent politicians ?
You do understand that such cause would not only affect the war
related parts of the government, but also those who protect
the people ?

Also, please remember that the "war related" department are not
only related to attacks, but also to defense. So, if you void these
depatments from using your software, you may very well be making it
difficult to them to SAVE lives.


-- 
 Rodrigo Barbosa                   - rodrigob at tisbrasil.com.br
 TIS 				   - Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil
 "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"  - http://www.tisbrasil.com.br/
 Brainbench Certified -> Transcript ID #3332104

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