<div dir="ltr"><div>Eric,</div><div><br></div><div>Could you explain where in the non-legally functional Persona non Grata Preamble that anyone is being "denied" use of the software? I'm not sure I see that. Shame, annoyed, socially discouraged perhaps but I don't see how it is "denied".</div><div><br></div><div>My horse and myself will be over here waiting for clarification.</div><div><br></div><div>Eric<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 7:44 AM Eric S. Raymond <<a href="mailto:esr@thyrsus.com">esr@thyrsus.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I reject the "Persona Non Grata" clause, and all other attempts at<br>
so-called "ethical" open-source licensing, in the strongest possible<br>
terms. To get entangled in this sort of thing would not merely<br>
be against OSI's charter as expressed in the OSD, it would invite<br>
second- and third-order effects that would be gravely harmful.<br>
<br>
This is really what I joined the list to say. The fairness-vs.-mission<br>
issue I discussed in my previous post, though serious, probably<br>
wouldn't have been enough to motivate me in itself.<br>
<br>
I initiated the founding of OSI so it could pursue and defend freedom.<br>
Thomas Paine had an apposite quote: "He that would make his own<br>
liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he<br>
violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to<br>
himself."<br>
<br>
Whatever hypothetical good might be done in individual cases by<br>
denying the use of open-source code to putatively evil persons and<br>
organizations would be swamped by the systemic harm from enabling<br>
people to use open-source licenses in political vendettas. Because<br>
such precedent, as Paine understood, always comes back to bite you;<br>
there would be no end to the feuds, the divisiveness, and the erosion<br>
of freedom if we went down that path.<br>
<br>
Clauses 5 and 6 are in the OSD in part for that reason, and approving<br>
mechanisms to end-run them - such as the Persona Non Grata clause -<br>
would be a direct and egregious violation of OSI's charter and<br>
my intentions in founding OSI. Such clauses are not even a fit topic<br>
for *discussion* here outside of a swift recognition that they are<br>
out of bounds.<br>
<br>
With whatever moral authority I still have here, I say to all<br>
advocates of soi-disant "ethical" licensing not just "No" but "To hell<br>
with you *and* the horse you rode in on."<br>
-- <br>
<a href="<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.catb.org/~esr/</a>">Eric S. Raymond</a><br>
<br>
As the Founding Fathers knew well, a government that does not trust its honest,<br>
law-abiding, taxpaying citizens with the means of self-defense is not itself<br>
worthy of trust. Laws disarming honest citizens proclaim that the government<br>
is the master, not the servant, of the people.<br>
-- Jeff Snyder<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
License-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:License-discuss@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">License-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>Eric Schultz, Developer and FOSS Advocate<br></div><div><a href="http://wwahammy.com" target="_blank">wwahammy.com</a><br></div><div><a href="mailto:eric@wwahammy.com" target="_blank">eric@wwahammy.com</a><br></div><div>@wwahammy</div><div>Pronouns: He/his/him<br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>