Re: LCS Copyright et al'

[Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com>]

Jarrod K Henry <magnwa@lionking.org> wrote:
> The product in question is a standard, NOT a program.

Yep, but last time I checked a shell script (for example) was a program.

Mostly, this thing hasn't even been written yet, so it's hard to comment
on it.  

But we have an ethical (and image) issue here:  We've got our social
contract hanging out on our web page, and we've got an announcement
out that LCS is being developed by Debian and Red Hat.  And our social
contract says that when we produce software for Debian it will be
free software.

And as far as I can see, our free software guidelines allow us to produce
a validation suite such that if it's changed the results can't legally
be represented as the results of that suite.  And that seems to be all
the protection that's needed here.

However, let's say that I'm wrong: let's say that there is a real need
for standard-oriented programs which are immutable.  Let's say that the
"don't pretend that this program is the same after it's been changed"
sort of clause isn't adequate.  If that's the case, shouldn't we update
our social contract to reflect this need?

-- 
Raul