From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice Subject: Re: Bioconductor package flowPeaks license Artistic 1.0? Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 18:29:51 +0100 Message-ID: <87immci5ps.fsf@nckx> References: <87pnlz9lro.fsf@elephly.net> <877e869t80.fsf@elephly.net> <87k16si685.fsf@nckx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41703) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ihzcc-0004JI-Ms for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 12:29:59 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ihzca-0006Da-PH for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 12:29:57 -0500 Received: from tobias.gr ([2001:470:7405::1]:56632) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ihzca-00063m-4w for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 12:29:56 -0500 In-reply-to: <87k16si685.fsf@nckx> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: guix-devel@gnu.org Cc: zimoun --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tobias Geerinckx-Rice =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A > zimoun =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A >> Other said, calling Artistic 1.0 non-free in this Bioconductor=20 >> case >> is more a flavour of taste than a real legal issue. > > No, it's a very real legal issue. :-( I should clarify: when the FSF calls the Artistic 1.0 licence=20 =E2=80=98vague=E2=80=99, that's not an aesthetic criticism. It means that the licence is broken and fails to do what it claims=20 to do: give you the licence (=3Dfreedom) to do something that would=20 not otherwise be allowed by copyright law. It means that you=20 can't prove, in court, that the licence says what you thought it=20 said. It's not merely ugly, it's defective and potentially=20 dangerous. This always happens when programmers think they can write their=20 own licence. It starts with a punny name (=E2=80=98artistic licence=E2=80= =99,=20 =E2=80=98WTFPL=E2=80=99, ha ha -_-) and the result is a useless buggy mess. Kind regards, T G-R --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEfo+u0AlEeO9y5k0W2Imw8BjFSTwFAl37s48ACgkQ2Imw8BjF STw9NA//fy4e2YTxJxMz9UHKW7dgcZe/q9vFwghhMwNpW4aarjBsgvfTofn+MqAO XwR9T2s1PBp1+ACRpVah+HOhi7FswttMGRmDa0s39bo8p0M8DQWQqTLkSENQW0Ur 2m4yM9obDn4lyovPTyAm0a90HrzJAD0FH13ZSSLrPISbLl9EMsS0eKtrEz8LjRWq tf63HzkgGAPVa4XdCkPvpZANAvDZWgtXSJGqiyeFjlOAHqVye+hLaNTgUgUwxag8 MEAnUOQA2fOiqZnShLAZTt4g5YH8xUscDbHeO6qm0cvd8yv+KuFSSxqrQTvseVwW 4FB7UqtfY+AY94rW3pfYz5Tu/NPCv+CjPt/ou7NBU25jx4WdMkPAv4NHDatXet3B Y3WcJIO4jiZLmu9ctxW5rq77djbuU+igQv6zgPr63jVAT6Xm62mW+Nyx3kEluKVQ HCT0oD3ul0inqiEu6uEgomoRrVJCpdcH1fdPYAfmgmZ88t6HJWXwsmOdOtv13GxC 6ntGBDgryJWOq+6xZrJU9To2EEpRDiJQjtgHoyUCqgpJzkz/UiIJg+9+qdVb2/Qo VMJ0nm7YoBuLuGpZFc8gl+P75ilD0N/A3lL2bcP6zWNV/LWsixdBPv52Z2C/V5df V2VhWFl83HNNZadExX8mtYOyK+b5g8KbyNqoCpz5SsT8wzhdCYc= =CP3h -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--