[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: DRAFT: debian-legal summary of the QPL



Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> >Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> >> Surely it's not the license that restricts the activities of the
> >> dissident, it's the local authorities? If my government decrees that
> >> anyone producing works that oblige source to be distributed with
> >> binaries will be shot, that doesn't mean that the GPL discriminates
> >> against a field of endeavour.
> >
> >The obvious difference is that there are no governments that have such
> >laws, while there are plenty of real world scenarios where privacy is
> >beneficial.  The dissident test is merely a reasonable extreme case
> >where that comes into play.
> 
> If there were, would we consider the GPL non-free?

It certainly wouldn't be free in that jurisdiction.  Whether Debian
decides to care about such jurisdicitions is, to some degree, a policy
decision.  The thing about privacy is that it affects people in
_every_ jurisdiction, so checking a license for whether it violates
your privacy helps everyone.

Regards,
Walter Landry
wlandry@ucsd.edu



Reply to: