OSD#5 needs a patch?

[David Presotto]

I never said that the GPL doesn't promote software freedom.
Where did that come from?  Nevertheless, it is a political statement (or
at least a philosophical one) as it is an attempt to influence
people into a different behaviour; a stronger statement
than the mere promotion of open source.  Although I personally would
rather make software capable of being used in whatever fashion the
user wishes, I wholeheartedly believe that the GPL is an open license.

I'm only using the inheritive (and anti-inheritive) licenses previously
discussed because they are examples of political (or at least
philosophical) battles which we have decided fall within the
bounds of the OSD.

I don't mean to be an obstruction to your better defining descriminatory.
I just think that

a) we don't necessarily need to.  Any license that is sufficiently
  discriminatory will be identified as such by the list.  Perhaps this
  is mob rule but it seems to be doing OK so far.

b) every tool that tries to push society into a different place is
  waging a political or philosophical battle.  That shouldn't be
  the premise for dismissing a license as 'not open'.

If you feel a need to better describe descrimination so that we don't end
up with endless churn on the license approval, perhaps that is a good
thing.  I'ld be happy if you just left out the sentence

	Proponents of open source software insist that software not be a
	battleground on which political or philosophical or business wars are waged.

I think the following piece

	In many jurisdictions around the world, discrimination on the basis of race,
	age, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, health status, and
	other personal characteristics is always illegal.  This open source
	principle is intended to extend that broad list, not to replace it.  To be
	consistent with this open source principle, all terms and conditions of the
	license must demonstrably encourage rather than discourage software freedom
	for all licensees.

stands alone and does not need to be extended by the other sentence.  You
don't need rewording, just omission.
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3