[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: Valentino Giudice
Subject: Re:
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2023 19:55:55 +0200

   >  Minds could be categorized as a "free speech zone" social network
   > are typically popular with fascists so count me out.
   Fascism and freedom of speech are entirely incompatible and
   antithetical to each other.
   It could be true that fascist today use free speech platforms, but it
   is certainly not what they desire.
   From reading from the FSF/GNU websites, it has always been my
   impression that freedom of speech is valued by the free software
   community, in a way it certainly is not by fascists.
   Indeed, filtering what one reads and publicly writes through the
   erratic whims of some corporation, typically guided by capitalist
   interests and the need to applease advertisers, as it usually happens
   on most platforms (such as X and Facebooks), implies restricting one's
   behavior in a way akin to what proprietary software leads to.
   > The licensing of the minds project is also questionable.
   Elgg dual-licenses the project, except plugins, under both the MIT
   license and the GPL 2.
   Obviously, if someone uses the whole of Elgg, they effectively have to
   use it under the GPL 2.
   Now, I agree with the GitHub comment, on the Elgg issue, that you
   referenced. Indeed, if Elgg is packaged with GPL-2.0 only plugins, it
   must have the GPL-2.0-only license (as a package).
   However, the issue is specifically about the identifier of the license
   for the whole package (for automated tools), which is not what is in
   question here.
   If someone uses Ellg without plugins, they can do so under the MIT
   license, which is, of course, AGPL-compatible.
   The project which is actually derived from Elgg
   is: [1]
   Indeed, the situation wasn't clear to me at first, so I asked.
   Minds is using the portion of Elgg which is released under the MIT
   license and is complying with the MIT license (in a way my dumb self
   didn't notice because I looked everywhere except the LICENSE file,
   which I assumed to be just the text of the
   AGPL): [2]
   I do have some issues with Minds, but as far as licensing is
   concerned, in relation to Elgg, it seems fine with me.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]