On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 05:33:51PM +0200, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > Jeremy Hankins wrote: > > Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com> writes: > > > > > >>What alternative do you offer to ensure that attribution occurs? > >>None. There is no alternative actually. > > > > > > Exactly: we offer no alternative. This is not a disagreement about > > which method of ensuring attribution is correct and acceptable, but a > > disagreement about whether or not it is appropriate to force attribution > > according to some particular standard. > > > > It is entirely within your rights as copyright holder to push whatever > > social agenda you wish with your software license -- but debian-legal's > > position is that that will make the license non-free. If you wish to > > require that it not be used in nuclear facilities, fine: non-free. If > > you require that people who use the software spend a moment to think > > about the plight of the homeless, fine: non-free. Just as, when you > > require attribution in a particular format and with a particular text, > > that's fine, but non-free. > Did you say this as an official debian spokesperson? His statement is consistent with the consensus view among regular participants of the debian-legal mailing list. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature