<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/25/2020 12:16 PM, Eric Schultz
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAMkzgA6_9MU6tLmudcnEtU_UV5KuP7tom4U=NSUrqw5qrffMdQ@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="auto">
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Feb 25, 2020,
8:02 AM Pamela Chestek <<a
href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
I don't see the point of these contortions. Why not just
write a license<br>
that says "everyone case use the software except
Amazon." It suspect it<br>
would be an enforceable license. Why are you trying to
fit it under the<br>
umbrella of "open source" too?<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Sure, that's an enforceable license, but it's
not FOSS. Lots of people value FOSS but are also concerned
about other issues in the world. If they feel their only
option is "ethical source", they're going to convince
themselves that's an acceptable choice. We need a set of
options, licensing or otherwise, that uphold the OSD and FSD
and allow them to make some different on the other issues in
the world. I'm trying to explore the licensing topic here.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div>Eric<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
You've assumed your premise to be true, that an ethical license must
be FOSS, but still haven't explained why. You also say "If they feel
their only option is 'ethical source', they're going to convince
themselves that's an acceptable choice." What's wrong with that?
Isn't that your goal?<br>
<br>
You claim to want a license that upholds the OSD yet the ethical
license proposals are fundamentally irreconcilable with the
non-discrimination values in the OSD. If the response is "the OSD
therefore is wrong," then you actually don't want a license that
upholds the OSD.<br>
<br>
Pam<br>
<br>
Pamela S. Chestek<br>
Chestek Legal<br>
PO Box 2492<br>
Raleigh, NC 27602<br>
919-800-8033<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.chesteklegal.com">www.chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>