Hi. I want to be as transparent as I can regarding this topic, however, the nature of it makes it difficult to ignore. I generally do not engage in typical discussions but the age checks are a major issue that mandates attention.
To make it plain and simple, in my opinion, age checks are part of a far bigger plan which will certainly pass because nothing in this world is random, especially not implementations of this kind. The only reason they are optional for now is to test the waters, to test how people would react, but they will certainly become mandatory in a year or two at most.
I also understand not complying is difficult due to the safety of developers and Whonix’s team, however, implementing age-checks kills the entire project purpose. Anonimity. It is not a matter of whether we can strip out the age checks or not but that credibility disappears.
Additionally, I know that Whonix is unique due to its design but there is a significant chance many people will migrate to projects that explicity reject these implementations.
It is a complicated topic and there is much to discuss but alternatives to this are crucial.
Thank you for reading.
AN OPERATING SYSTEM PROVIDER OR DEVELOPER THAT DISTRIBUTES AN OPERATING SYSTEM OR APPLICATION UNDER LICENSE TERMS THAT PERMIT A RECIPIENT TO COPY, REDISTRIBUTE, AND MODIFY THE SOFTWARE WITHOUT ANY PLATFORM-IMPOSED TECHNICAL OR CONTRACTUAL RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED BY THE PROVIDER OR DEVELOPER ON INSTALLING ALL MODIFIED VERSIONS.
Arguably any software license that isn’t CC0 public domain does impose “contractual restrictions”. The GPL (which Linux is under GPLv2) has one of the most heavy “contractual restrictions”.
Most FSF, OSI and FSDG approved licenses allow modifications and redistribution but most popular licenses only under restrictions such as attribution and copyleft.
Possible counterargument to the “a license is not a contract” argument:
As things stand, it seems likely that the judge in the case will rule that that the GPL-enforcement lawsuits can be a matter of contract law, not just copyright law, which would be a major change to how GPL enforcement works.
However, there may still be an escape hatch:
ON INSTALLING ALL MODIFIED VERSIONS.
There indeed is not any contractual restriction in the GPL against installing modified versions. There isn’t a restriction against installing whatsoever. From the GPLv2:
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program (independent of having been made by running the Program). Whether that is true depends on what the Program does.
From the GPLv3:
You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains in force.