Re: Interpretation of the GR
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 04:04:37PM -0500, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
> Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> writes:
> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 08:17:25AM -0500, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
>
> >> But the issue of whether or not they're distributable at all is
> >> absolutely orthogonal to the GR. They have no bearing on each other
> >> whatsoever.
> >
> > A work can't possibly ever be "free" if it's not even distributable.
> > This is plain from DFSG#1. If the GR is labelling undistributable
> > works "free", then it is in no way orthogonal to distributability.
>
> True. But when determining DFSG freedom debian developers (often in the
> guise of d-l) can decide on an interpretation -- the courts don't really
> care about that. When deciding on whether its legal to distribute at
> all what we or the GR say is beside the point because it's not up to us;
> it's up to the courts. We can have a GR claiming that the moon is made
> of green cheese, and that doesn't change anything unless it has a
> bearing on whether we decide a license belongs in main/contrib or in
> non-free.
If a GR says something is Free, then it must be saying that either 1:
"the work is distributable", or 2: "distributability is not relevant
to freeness". A GR that calls a work Free is not orthogonal to
distributability; it's intrinsically tied to it.
(Limiting this response to the question or orthogonality, leaving the
question of whether #1 is true or not to other subthreads.)
--
Glenn Maynard
Reply to: