[License-discuss] Who do we consider to be part of, or separate from, the open source community?

[Russell McOrmond]

On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 8:22 PM Nigel T <nigel.2048 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 7:03 PM Tobie Langel <tobie at unlockopen.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I’m not arguing this point of view. I’m reporting on a point of view
>> commonly held within the community.
>>
>
> Repeated assertion doesn't show that this is a "commonly held" view.
>

This isn't specifically to Nogel or Tobie, and I've been doing my best to
keep any person's name out of my contributions so that no individual will
feel attacked even if I feel attacked by them.


I am aware that at this point most governments have embraced the use of
Open Source, with some government departments actively contributing code.
This makes the  views of governments, as well as those who believe that
obeying (and enforcing) the law of the specific country you live in, to
also be a point of view commonly held by the community.  I would love to
see a valid survey, but I suspect respecting and enforcing the law is a
much more widely held view than believing that sofware authors should try
to enact public policy through license agreements.


I've asked a few times how some people are using the term "open source" to
include people who disagree with the intent of the OSD.  I have a follow-up
question, which is how they are defining the open source community to
include those who are part of the "ethical source" campaign and yet doesn't
include law enforcement agencies such as the U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement agency?


As a Canadian citizen who isn't a fan of some of the tactics of US ICE I
have been very frustrated to read about US citizens, who have more of an
ability to influence their own government than I do, are allowing
themselves to be distracted by the "No Tech for ICE" anti-movement.  And
yes, it is a distraction -- trying to restrict the use of technology by a
law enforcement agency through licensing takes energy from useful
activities relating to changing the laws which law enforcement agencies
enforce.

Given I believe that US citizens are ultimately responsible for the
activities of ICE, should I author a license that restricts US citizens
from using any of "my" software until they have fixed their laws?  Should I
as a Canadian citizen be trying to influence US law through my software
licensing?   If I should, then should other global citizens?  Maybe "No
Tech for USA" until the country re-joins the ICJ and finally joins the
ICC.  I happen to support international law, and believe that it is
problemmatic for a country operating outside of their own borders to not be
part of and respect the ICJ and ICC.   (Oh, and those who are opposed to
terrorism should read "Nicaragua v. United States").


-- 
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>

"The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware
manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or portable
media player from my cold dead hands!" http://c11.ca/own
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20200322/8ee4257c/attachment.html>