US regime war against opensource

[Pasdar]

This has been discussed on other sections of this forum for some time now: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1388148

However, I'm surprised its not discussed more. The decision of the US regime to ban countries they don't agree with from accessing open source is a direct attack on GNU/GPL. Why is source forge following this racist law and not simply relocating their webhost to a non racist country?

[SoFl W]

Racist?

[Tristam Green]

Pasdar, what are you talking about?

If a country is being sanctioned from trade, that includes all kinds of trade.

Race has jack-all to do with it.

[MacJack]

More primitive than racist.

[t0p]

OP: I don't agree with trade bans any more than you do. But this isn't "an attack on GNU/GPL". All software (and other products too) are affected by these bans, not just open source software.

Also, this isn't really anything to do with race. The US government has nothing against Syrians, Iranians or North Koreans as such. Their problem is with the governments of those countries. The USA wants to change these governments' foreign and defense policies - ultimately, they'd like to change the governments - and these bans are just one of the USA's strategies. I don't like these bans, but I think they are preferable to the military solutions advocated by some Americans.

Anyway, it's not racism - it's politics.

[ankspo71]

I'm just now learning about this. Here's an update.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/08/sourceforge_reverses_blanket_blocking/

[thatguruguy]

As set forth in sourceforge's statement on the issue (http://sourceforge.net/blog/clarifying-sourceforgenets-denial-of-site-access-for-certain-persons-in-accordance-with-us-law/):

However, until either the designated governments alter the practices that got them on the sanctions list, or the US government’s policies change, the situation must remain as it is.

As such, one option is that the nations involved decide to no longer do fun stuff like harbor terrorists.

[Pasdar]

Well I guess this is Ubuntu users for ya, lol. You guys understand do you? This is an attack against the very fundaments on which open source stands.
1)

5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.

6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.

2) These products are not US made products, open source is not owned by U.S, its citizens or its regime, so they have no say about it. Not even the slightest bit.

3) Proprietary software is readily available in all these countries at a cost of a few cents.

4) Any moron can use a proxy, not that that's needed, there are many mirror sites for this all. The point is, you're barring the popularity of open source... and for what? biggoted US policies? pffft

5) I'm happy I'm European.

[Tristam Green]

Well I guess this is Ubuntu users for ya, lol. You guys understand do you? This is an attack against the very fundaments on which open source stands.
1)

5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.

6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.

The license isn't called into question here. The ownership of the site, and its ability to do business with those nations, is.


2) These products are not US made products, open source is not owned by U.S, its citizens or its regime, so they have no say about it. Not even the slightest bit.

True, but if the host resides on US servers, as I'm almost certain it does, then it has to comply with US and/or international (in this case, UN) law.


3) Proprietary software is readily available in all these countries at a cost of a few cents.

That doesn't have any bearing on the argument, but ok...


4) Any moron can use a proxy, not that that's needed, there are many mirror sites for this all. The point is, you're barring the popularity of open source... and for what? biggoted US policies? pffft

They're also barring the popularity of McDonald's, Levi's Jeans, and Boeing aircraft. What's your point?


5) I'm happy I'm European.

I'm happy for you being happy that you're European.

Current status: in before the lock.

[JSeymour]

2) These products are not US made products, open source is not owned by U.S, its citizens or its regime, so they have no say about it. Not even the slightest bit.They do if the servers upon which they're hosted reside in the U.S.


3) Proprietary software is readily available in all these countries at a cost of a few cents.I guess, by that, you mean pirated proprietary software?


4) Any moron can use a proxy, not that that's needed, there are many mirror sites for this all. The point is, you're barring the popularity of open source... and for what? biggoted US policies? pffftBigoted? "A prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own." If opposing the behaviour of the countries in question automatically classifies one as a "bigot," I guess I'm a bigot, too. (Actually more a bigot than the U.S., itself. I feel our reactions to the intransigent anti-social behaviour of the countries in question have been weak.)


5) I'm happy I'm European.Then I'm happy for you. (Why do I suspect you're not really European--at least in the sense that most people think when they think "European?")

For the record: I don't agree with the policy and believe it hypocritical.

Jim

[Sporkman]

the US regime

Does a democratically-elected government count as a "regime"..?

Edit: I guess it does: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regime

[ikt]

gg on the thread title, more sensational than fox news.

[Groucho Marxist]

Does a democratically-elected government count as a "regime"..?

Edit: I guess it does: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regime


sudo apt-get install melodramaOpen source, and any socio-political philosophies pertaining to said code, is irrelevant in this piece of United States foreign policy.

[Tristam Green]

sudo apt-get install melodrama

Open source is irrelevant in this piece of United States foreign policy.

Words cannot express how hard I laughed. Bravo, sir. :)

[blueshiftoverwatch]

The law might officially bar people in certain countries the US government has trade restrictions on from using software developed/hosed the the US. But, are these laws anything more than a formality? I doubt anyone follows them and they would be really hard to enforce anyway. If someone in Iran wants to use Fedora they're going to do it whether it's illegal or not.

[Groucho Marxist]

Words cannot express how hard I laughed. Bravo, sir. :)


Thank you, good sir :)

I'm waiting until Godwin's Law kicks in and this thread increases it's hilarity by 28%.

[matthew]

This is very clearly a political thread, and not completely related to free and open source issues. For that reason, the thread has been closed.