Re: Bug#227159: ocaml: Worse, the QPL is not DFSG-free
On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 12:02:21PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 06:37:29PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > luther@debian.org wrote:
> > > Still, in this matter we need to find a balance between the right of the
> > > developer (who don't wish people to use the software in disrespect of the
> > > licence) and the wish of users who want to do modifications, and as long as
> > > they respect the licence, should not be furthermore molested.
> > >
> > > The fear of harassment only comes for someone who is willingly breaking the
> > > licence, and seriously, do we want to encourage those ?
> >
> > Or anyone who can be accused of breaking the license. And in order to
> > show you aren't, you would need to show up in the licensor's jurisdiction.
>
> Well, this may work in the US, where trigger happy legal action is comon
> place, as shown by the RIAA-sues-the world news we commonly get.
What procedures do you have in place in France to ensure that ultimately
unsuccessful lawsuits don't get started?
> > > And finally, i know the upstream authors personnally, and i also understand
> > > their situation enough to know that they won't engage in any such harrasment,
> > > even if it was possible.
> >
> > I can understand that. However, we cannot say "the QPL is Free because
> > the non-Free clauses will not be executed by one particular user of the
> > QPL". Furthermore, if upstream has no intention of engaging in such
> > harrassment, perhaps they could be persuaded to waive the clause that
> > gives them the ability to do so. (Yes, I do understand that upstream
> > does not like to deal with licensing issues.)
>
> And where exactly does the DFSG make this non-free ?
DFSG #14: Just because the Debian maintainer doesn't think a non-free term
will be exercised, doesn't make the non-free term magically disappear. Nor
does wandering into debian-legal, sticking his fingers in his ears, and
shouting "laa laa laa! I can't hear you! Your arguments are bogus!" make
the non-free term go away, either.
- Matt
Reply to: