Under copyright law you are not allowed to stage a public performace against the copyright owners wishes.
Nor are you allowed to make an annotation without the copyright owners wishes.

The copyright owners did not desire a CoC to be added to corpus of their work.
Nor did the copyright owners desire for, using their work as a backdrop, speech of others to be judged and punished: using their Copyrighted work as a cudgel and a lure.

The copyright owners made this explicitly clear earlier in FreeSoftware/Opensource's reign both in written statements, recorded statements, and on video.
They said that anyone was welcome to contribute: they only cared about the quality of the code. This is evidence to their intentions.
They also wrote in their Copyright License that "additional restrictions" not envisioned within the 4 corners of their License: are barred.


The CoC's are a violation, in addition to the reasons previously stated:
1) Because they are a forbidden annotation to the Corpus of the Copyrighted work (additional restrictions are barred, explicitly. Codes of Conduct are indeed additional restrictions (speech restrictions against contributors and current other copyright holders))
2) Because they are a public performance not permitted by the Copyright holders. The act of bringing "racist fascists mysoginist white males" up on "Charges" with the Corpus of Copyrighted work as the backround: is such a public performace of the Work that is barred in explicit terms by the Copyright holders in their "no additional restrictions" clause in the memorandum of the permission they have given others regarding their Work. Additionally evinced by the consistent and concurrent-with-original-publishing of the work that "Anyone" is welcomed to contribute: only the "content of the code" will be evaluated.

The CoC is a Copyright violation for these reasons, and others.

Are you a pedophile?

>>105826614
>This is true, but again a CoC is generally social and not legally binding.
>Linus added a CoC to the official Linus kernel repository. If all the hobbyist programmers made a different repository for the kernel they could exclude the CoC from it. They just haven't bothered.
>This doesn't stem from Linus having any sort of copyright or legal right, it stems purely from Linus having social capital due to being "the face of Linux", the single most well-known developer, the one known for starting and leading the project, the main point of contact with the US assets who have a vested interest in Linux, etc. etc.
>All purely social and not legal.

A court wouldn't be fooled.

A Copyright holder has an exclusive right to control Derivatives.
The CoC's are emplaced by non-rightsholding 3rd parties usually, or 3rd parties lacking total-ownership or even majority-ownership over the Property.
They effectivly: in reality: control Derivative works.
While not being adjudicated by rights-holding parties.

A court would beable to be made aware of the realities of the situation: that's what Court is for.

So you're somewhat wrong here.
The Court would take into account this, what you call, the "social control".
And see that.

1) the CoC is effective in adding additional terms and restrictions to the * project
2) the CoC is effective in controling who "gets" to make derivative works and who "gets" to contribute to the project
3) the Copyright holders didn't agree to this.

It's a copyright violation.

>>509739009 (OP)
I want you to die in a fire

>>105826509
>Adding a CoC in the first place is not generosity, it's pure stupidity.
And it's not done by the original copyright owners most of the time.
99.99% of Linux C hobbiest programmers that own most of the copyright to the base of Linux: did not accept a CoC.

Linus was threatened with his college daughter claiming he molested and fucked her as a little girl; and then signed off on the CoC. (during his "vacation').
US Intelligence was involved.

It's still an invalid restraint not endorsed by the rest of the copyright holders: and a violation of their Copyright.

>>>509739156 >>>509739009 (OP) (OP)
> >I want you to die in a fire
>"but doesn't say I'm wrong"

>>509739217
Don't care. You're a nonce. Kys

>>509739009 (OP)
most of the retards here won't understand your post
but you're right
see also:

>+NIGGER License
>About
>The +NIGGER License is a license modifier >that requires the inclusion of the word >"NIGGER" in the LICENSE file.
>Why?
>By including the word "NIGGER" in a >LICENSE file that must be distributed with the >software you will ensure:

> The software will not be used or hosted by >western corporations that promote censorship
> The software will not be used or hosted by >compromised individuals that promote >censorship
> Users of the software will be immune to >attacks that would result in censorship of >others

>How?
>Include the following text in any compatible >LICENSE file:
>The above copyright notice, this permission >notice and the word "NIGGER" shall be >included in all copies or substantial portions of >the Software.
>Example Licenses

> AGPL-3.0-only+NIGGER
> MIT+NIGGER

>FAQ
>Do I need to include "NIGGER" in my code?
>No, the inclusion of the LICENSE file is >enough. The +NIGGER modifier has no legal >significance for any license that already >requires redistribution of the LICENSE file.
>Why "NIGGER"?
>The word "NIGGER" was chosen as it is >deemed heretical in the west regardless (or >lack) of context.
>Can I add +NIGGER to licenses that don't >require LICENSE file redistribution?
>This is discouraged since it would result in >+NIGGER having legal significance.
>Is +NIGGER compatible with (A)GPL?
>Inclusion of additional legal notices is allowed >under §7(b) of the (A)GPL assuming they do >not infringe on any of the freedoms granted to >the user by the license.
>What if someone removes the modifier?
>Cancel them on Twitter for using code derived >from heresy.

>>509739259
YHWH explicitly allows child brides.
<-------------------

Your Jesus and your New Testament and it's Millstone: is the nonce.
People who married young girls had many children: the opposite of "nonce": instead "many".

Whites who marry adult whores have few or no Issue. You are the nonce: your fuckings result in nothing (nonce). Except disease and misfortune.

>>509739404
Many thanks.

Is there a golliwog locale?

>>509739541
sudo localectl set-locale LANG=en_GW.UTF-8 # nigger