Re: [Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>] Re: Debian & BSD concerns
Paul Nathan Puri writes:
> Where you say 'free licenses cannot be revoked': What is your authority
> for that statement?
I'm saying that in my opinion, revocable licenses are not free. My
"authority" is the DFSG and my understanding of what free software is. It
really isn't a question of law.
> The licensor can set the terms and conditions upon which revocation may
> be a consequence.
Yes, of course he can. That is the whole point of having a copyright or
patent, isn't it? I just meant that if he does choose to release his work
under a revocable license, that it should not be considered free.
Note: by "revocable license" I don't mean ones that are automatically
revoked should the licensee fail to comply with the conditions. I mean
ones such as the IBM Postfix license that can be revoked at will by the
licensor.
--
John Hasler This posting is in the public domain.
john@dhh.gt.org Do with it what you will.
Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind.
Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address.
Reply to: