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

Re: DFSG-freeness of any license that fixes the ASP loophole



Francesco Poli wrote:
I'm not convinced that there actually is a problem.
But anyway, I'm under the impression that it could be impossible to
address this "problem" without doing more harm than good.
Any "solution" I've seen so far is either utterly non-free, or non-free
in subtler ways.

The only point from the DFSG I can conceive, with any stretch of the imagination, such a clause to conflict would be "No discrimination against fields of endeavour". But from /usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy.html/ch-archive.html#s-dfsg this only means no prohibition of **use** in any field of endeavour:

"The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research."

Say I write a network-related software which I license under the Sleepycat License + the additional ASP-fix clause which I concocted, I am not outright *preventing* the *use* of that software by any over-the-network service provider. I am only placing a requirement on the use. The DFSG nowhere says that I cannot place a condition on the *use* of a work.

Considering even the tests: 1) the "desert island" test is not applicable, since such a castaway as described will not be able to provide a service over the network. 2) the "dissident" will also not provide a service across the network, since he wishes to keep himself secret. Even if he provides a service to fellow dissidents across a scrambled https connection, he will be required to distribute any source or modified source only to the users of his service, i.e. his fellow dissidents which is allowed by the dissident test.

I'm not sure what the "tentacles of evil" test even means! What "required freedoms" can't the unfortunate under-evil-control author take away? At any rate, I don't believe the tentacles of evil test would make my Sleepycat+ASP-fix license non-DFSG-free. Please explain what exact clause of DFSG such a license would conflict with.

Shriramana Sharma.



Reply to: