On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 02:23:59PM +0100, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
> On 14 Nov 2003 13:18:02 +0100
> Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> wrote:
> > Scripsit Tim Dijkstra <newsuser@famdijkstra.org>
> > > TSUCHIYA Masatoshi <tsuchiya@namazu.org> wrote:
> > > > Each User may also freely distribute the Program, whether in
> > > > its original form or modified, to any third party or parties,
> > > > PROVIDED that the provisions of Section 3 ("NO WARRANTY") will
> > > > ALWAYS appear on, or be attached to, the Program, which is
> > > > distributed substantially in the same form as set out herein
> > > > and that such intended distribution, if actually made, will
> > > > neither violate or otherwise contravene any of the laws and
> > > > regulations of the countries having jurisdiction over the User
> > > > or the intended distribution itself.
> > > First, IANAL and not a native speaker nor a regular debian-legal
> > > reader, but I can't see what is exactly nonfree in this piece of
> > > licence. In my reading it just says,
> > Apart from the "you must follow the law" clause, it also only allows
> > derivates that are "distributed substantially in the same form as set
> > out herein". That is a restriction on modification, which fails the
> > DFSG.
> Which indeed seems a restriction, but a little vague one, especially as
> the first two lines read: 'Each User may also freely distribute the
> Program, whether in its original form or modified, to any third party or
> parties'.
What if you parse it as "the Program which is distributed substantially
in the same form as set out herein much have the the provisions
attached"? (ie "substantially in the same form..." is a qualifier for
"the Program" rather than a requirement in itself). Then you must keep
the provision in or on it, as long as you don't significantly change
the form. (Presumably that would mean significantly altering the
contents.)
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 01:44:46PM +0200, David Starner wrote:
> > First, IANAL and not a native speaker nor a regular debian-legal reader,
> > but I can't see what is exactly nonfree in this piece of licence. In my
> > reading it just says,
> >
> > 1) Do what you want with it
> > 2) Keep a NO WARRANTY section in the licence
> > 3) Don't do any illegal stuff
>
> The last is the killer; say you're a suspected dissident that's prohibited
> from using a computer or computing software, making your copying of the
> software illegal. Thus after using this software send an email to
> journalists revealing the ongoing genocide of your people, and escaping
> to the free world, you are now open to civil prosecution for copyright
> violation. It discriminates against classes of users and thus violates
> the DFSG.
It says that the distribution must follow the law... Not that the
recipient must do so. So you'd have to be a dissident prohibited from
using a computer, giving out the software to others in such a way as
to contravene the local law.
So it _is_ still a violation, in a way...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Paul "TBBle" Hampson, MCSE
6th year CompSci/Asian Studies student, ANU
The Boss, Bubblesworth Pty Ltd (ABN: 51 095 284 361)
Paul.Hampson@Anu.edu.au
"No survivors? Then where do the stories come from I wonder?"
-- Capt. Jack Sparrow, "Pirates of the Caribbean"
This email is licensed to the recipient for non-commercial
use, duplication and distribution.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature