Re: (FINISH) Correct non-US solution
From the tone of your remarks, it appears that you expect laws
to be reasonable and logical. Unfortunately, that expectation may be
>>"Jonathan" == Jonathan Walther <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Jonathan> No. The scheme makes us less liable than we already are,
Jonathan> since it shows that we are "trying". It puts us ahead of
Jonathan> every other Linux distribution out there. Certainly we
Jonathan> only distinguish non-US stuff right now. But the laws of
Jonathan> France and Russia are equally clear and well known.
Jonathan> We don't increase our liability... How can increasing our
Jonathan> compliance to the law make us more liable? Sheesh. No, I
Jonathan> don't propose making us more RESPONSIBLE for following the
Jonathan> law, but propose making us better ABLE to follow the law.
Jonathan> As is currently the case, a package wouldn't have
Jonathan> restrictions unless it was brought to a Debian maintainers
Jonathan> attention what the law was. Why hunt out trouble? Let it
Jonathan> come to you. For heavens sakes.
A diplomat is a man who can convince his wife she'd look stout in a
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E