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

Re: Darwin Streaming Server

so basically, since they decide to be a little leniant in some regards,
they are considered DFSG non-free, while if they would have removed the
leniency from the license, they would be considered DFSG free.

I'll be blunt, I find that extremely stupid (or perhaps, I'm just the
stupid one).  

In a way, one could say that Perl is not free because since you can
license it under the Artistic License or the GPL, since they are
slightly different, depending on how you license it, you will be treated
differently, therefore since some people (for what ever reason) might be
forced to license it under one or the other, its effectivly
discriminating against them.  This can apply to any multiply licensed
software (mozilla?)

Basically, if I decide to release software I write under a DFSG free
license, albiet a strict one, its considered DFSG free.

If I then decide to lessen the restrictions on a certian class of
individuals, why did I just make my DFSG free license, a DFSG free


On Wed, 2001-10-31 at 00:41, Colin Mattson wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 12:34:56AM -0500, Shaya Potter wrote:
> > so a license that is DFSG free to everybody, just different amounts of
> > DFSG free to different people is considered non-free?
> Correct, and that's exactly why it's non free -- it's different amounts to
> different people.
> >From the DFSG at http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines :
> >5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
> >The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
> >
> >6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
> >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.
> By restricting businesses into distributing all of their changes, it's 
> essentially discriminating against a group of persons.
> We again see something that could be considered a violation (depending on how
> anal one chooses to be about it) when it comes to fields of endeavor -- personal
> use, one endeavor, is free to make changes and use them.  Everyone else in 
> their respective fields of endeavor is affected in another means altogether
> by the license (and thus restricting their use of the software).
> -- 
> Colin Mattson
> colol@ionet.net
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: