Re: CDDL, OpenSolaris, Choice-of-venue and the star package ...

[Adam McKenna <adam@flounder.net>]

On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 03:00:24PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 12:59:25PM -0700, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > It's not a cost, it's a risk.  There are plenty of other risks that we take
> > when we distribute software, that we consider acceptable.  What makes this 
> > one unacceptable?
> 
> The fact that it's a risk *imposed explicitly by the license*.  This is not
> a risk that's mitigated by cautious adherence to the license, and it is not
> a risk that's inherent in the exercise of rights that belong exclusively to
> the copyright holder; it's a risk that you are asked to accept in exchange
> for the right to exercise the four freedoms with respect to the work.
> 
> I'm sure there are lots of people who are willing to accept this risk, and
> I'm even fairly confident that doing so is a win (at least with respect to
> copyright holders that are known quantities, like Sun or Apple).  Still, I
> don't believe it's compatible with the principles of Free Software as
> expressed in the DFSG.

I see your point, and I can see how you think this violates the spirit
of the DFSG, but on the other hand I think that we shouldn't give undue
consideration to potential corner cases (such as a copyright holder using 
this clause to harass and abuse).  The risk here is certainly lower than, 
for example, distributing something we know is patented.

--Adam
-- 
Adam McKenna  <adam@debian.org>  <adam@flounder.net>