Re: [fielding@apache.org: Review of proposed Apache License, version 2.0]

[Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net>]

Scripsit Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org>
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 07:43:01PM -0500, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:

> > There is also no way to be sure that the next minor upstream Emacs
> > release will still be entirely free software, and Debian has been
> > bitten by this before.  So why not move everything to non-free which
> > is not under a "GPL, version 2 only" license?

> That the GNU FDL is not DFSG-free tells us nothing about the
> DFSG-freeness of *any* other license.

Um, the GFDL was not a part of that debate at all. Brian was
responding to some opinions I had about Apache's apparent intent to
knowingly include patent-encumbered algorithms in their product.  He
was saying, by a fairly usual reductio-ad-absurdum argument, that he
did not find my reasoning convincing. Even though I still think my
point was valind, I don't find his counterargument "hysterically
absurd".

-- 
Henning Makholm          "Den nyttige hjemmedatamat er og forbliver en myte.
                    Generelt kan der ikke peges på databehandlingsopgaver af
                  en sådan størrelsesorden og af en karaktér, som berettiger
              forestillingerne om den nye hjemme- og husholdningsteknologi."