No, it was designed to shield law enforcement officers violating the Ku Klux Klan Act from legitimate lawsuits. See [1], which is the case where it started. Qualified immunity is only relevant when the lawsuit is not frivolous anyway...
If you look at the significance of the place (The Tian'anmen is literally on the national emblem of China, and the tomb of Mao is on the square for example), it's hard to rename something that widely known. It's much easier to pull one of the events that happen there under the rug, because unlike in the west the name is associated to much more.
Specifically, it violates freedom 3 of the FSF definition (redistribute changes), and section 3 of the OSI definition (Derived Works). This freedom is at the core of what FOSS is.
And that's before the violation of freedom 0, "The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose" of the non commercial licenses.
I don't think this commit has anything to do with wireguard. It's a fix of a bug in the kernel TCP stack, which wireguard doesn't use. (Beware, the wireguard-linux repo is a "fork" of the complete linux kernel)
And even if it did, a userland TUN implementation of the wireguard protocol probably doesn't have the same bugs as the linux kernel one.
Looking at the supported platforms, it looks like the only one is Linux. The README has this to say about it though: "This will run on Linux; however YOU SHOULD NOT RUN THIS ON LINUX. Instead use the kernel module; see the installation page for instructions."
The bill authorize it using any technical means, specifically mentioning using classified methods («prescrire le recours au moyens de l'État soumis au secret de la défense nationale»)
> Once you start coming up with rules about how you'd do that, you're inventing a serialisation format, and you're exactly back to the problem where your original question arose.
> When I hear people talk about doing what you can to not have mass layoffs I don't think what they mean is that the company has an obligation to the employees that overrides their obligations to their shareholders
Depends on who's talking/the situation. When you hear people talking about not closing a profitable factory instead of laying people off to delocalize, that's pretty much what they mean.
> Any company that doesn't do regional pricing is only interested in doing business with rich countries. Which sucks but is understandable. I wish they were more honest about it though.
This may be true if your cost per client/customer/etc is either negligible (such as with digital goods delivery), or dependent on their country (eg. retail).
Here, the bulk of their cost is computing resources, and they (according to their profile page) don't even make enough to cover it with the current price. I don't think this cost would go down with the customer location.
Yeah, it sucks a lot that people in rich countries can afford things people in other countries cannot, but that's kinda what "rich country" means.
Civil law as in not common law, not civil law as in not penal law.
Countries with civil law systems tend not to have contempt of court (or very limited versions). Of course, that's variable from country to country, civil and common law being more akin to trend than hard categories.