Re: DRAFT: debian-legal summary of the QPL
On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 07:47:24PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> "On request" doesn't seem to create any problems for the dissident test.
> For the request to be made, the dissident must already be known.
Advertise on television, requesting all such code. If the dissident watches
television, he's aware of the request. (I don't think "you can't prove he
saw it" is an interesting line of reasoning.)
It prohibits making private modifications. I modify the work, give it to my
friend, and we agree not to distribute it further (perhaps it's a dangerous
modification, such as a DoS or virus; patent concerns; perhaps it's simply
ugly code that I don't want seen). 6c prevents this.
(Actually, I'm not sure if #6c is referring to the modified source of the
work--as I initially read it--or the software linking against the work, but
it applies either way.)
It also has no expiration. If I distribute under #6 at all, I have to keep
it and the source around indefinitely; the initial developer might find out
about it ten years from now and request it. (The GPL's "written offer"
has an explicit limit.)
I'm not sure that any requirement that I keep stuff around is acceptable.
(Disk space costs money.) The GPL's "written offer" is in this category,
but it's one of several choices; it's easily possible for me to distribute
the work without having to packrat the source.
--
Glenn Maynard
Reply to: