Re: GR proposal: the AGPL does not meet the DFSG (take 2)
Frank Lin PIAT a écrit :
> Russell Coker wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> First, network protocols that "do not allow to display" anything are
>>> abundant, since no network protocol "displays" anything -- clients that
>>> use the protocol do. This is true for HTTP, FTP, SMTP, and whatnot.
>> If you connect to my SMTP server you will see a legal disclaimer (which I
>> claim to be as valid as any that you may see in a .sig).
>> Now in terms of granting rights, if my mail server contained AGPL code
>> and this was displayed in the SMTP protocol then a user could connect
>> to it and discover whether I was using code for which they could demand
>> the source.
> I disagree with your interpretation.
> The AGPL states "prominently offer all users", displaying at protocol
> level doesn't comply with either "prominently" nor with "all users"
> (because only a few sysadmins will telnet to port 25.)
> Such offer should be on SMTP *and* on the website offering this service.
I fail to see how it would be more prominently offered. At least tcp/25
is related to the service itself, a website has nothing to do with it.
(I mean, there /might/ be a website offering the service, but in most
cases there is not).