Re: analog copyright take 2
Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > > As far as your first point is concerned, I'm happy that saying "everything
> > > on this CD is free software" is good enough to satisfy the licence. I wanted
> > > to allow distributors to sell the CD, but make sure that users knew that
> > > they were paying for the physical medium, producers' time etc. and not the
> > > program itself. Isn't this a problem that everyone faces? Otherwise a
> > > reseller could charge a commercial-software rate, and claim if challenged
> > > that it was a realistic charge for their time: the users should be able
> > > to assess this for themselves beforehand.
> It sound like the author wants some restriction on the price that can be
> charged when obtaining his software.
I don't think so. He simply wants people to know that the software they are
buying is free software, so they are aware there is an alternative way to get
it if the CD manufacturer overprices it. He's not preventing the manufacturer
from selling it at any price.
> It was my understanding that there
> was no such restriction on "Free Software". One can charge any fee at all
> for delivering such software. The buyer is, of course free to go to a
> cheaper source.
He just wants to ensure that the buyer is made aware that there is a cheaper
> I don't think the license suggests that the resellers would need to
> declare anything beyond "Debian" to declare it "free" since SPI goes out
> of its way to advertise the fact that Debian is "Free Software".
see shy jo
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .