Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, somebody was not amused. No clue why...
Both are GPLd programs, most likely with copyright ownership spread across large numbers of contributors in many countries. The GPL says you can't distribute the program unless you include the complete source code. To legally distribute a version of a GPLd image manipulation program with a closed-source currency detection module in it, you would need to get every person who holds copyright in that program to agree -…
That said, it does present a pretty little puzzle for the FOSS community. Given governments' recent roles in expanding the reach of FOSS software, I don't think we can ignore the question of what happens when and where the interests of the state conflict with those of the FOSS community. Here, specifically, we have a case where a government may desire a "feature" anathema to the community, but likely can't force the community to accept such a requirement. What they might be able to do is outlaw any version of the package which does not incorporate the restriction. How effectively can could they enforce it? Not much, perhaps, right now, but we'd be fooling ourselves to think they never could. It's all but certain they're going to keep trying, even if it proves utterly impossible.
Thank you for responding, A1kmm. This is what I was really hoping to see: some actual discussion of the point. In any case, I apologize for offending whoever downmodded me. I'll try not to be quite so snarky in future.