Re: APSL 2.0

[MJ Ray <markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk>]

Adam Warner <lists@consulting.net.nz> wrote:
> Here's a mere consequence: If Debian is persuaded that the APSL 2.0 is
> DFSG-free then a subsequent revision of the GPL with the addition of a
> viral electronic service clause would also be DFSG-free.

It is expected that GPL-3 will contain something similar to the Affero GPL
requirement for remote services to offer users the code.  Do you object
to that?  If so, why?  If you are offering interaction with the code
via some sort of remote procedure call, you are not using it privately
for your own ends and some of the users may want to adapt the software,
which is a freedom normally offered by free software.

I think you are unwise to throw words like "leeches" and "viral" around
so freely.  That sort of thing spoiled an otherwise interesting email
for me.

-- 
MJR/slef   My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
      http://mjr.towers.org.uk/   jabber://slef@jabber.at