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

Re: Zope license

On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 01:29:51PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> Bruce Perens <bruce@pixar.com> wrote:
> > > 3) Is it actually possible for a license (as opposed to a signed contract)
> > > to restrict use?  My understanding was that copyright law was all about
> > > copying.
> > 
> > See the GPL language on this - something like "you haven't signed this
> > contract, but you have no other license to copy or use the software.".
> > 
> > IMO you can grant rights while restricting other rights that the user
> > would have had _without your grant_. They have the choice of accepting
> > your contract or not.
> They've not written their license in this fashion -- it's perfectly
> legal to distribute a copy of the Zope editor to someone without charge
> (without a contract).  So the recipient of such a copy is not bound by any
> such additional contract.
> The copyright license is still relevant if the recipient wishes to make
> copies of the Zope editor, but that's not the issue we're talking about.
> [This is why we don't need a special "no button" clause in the DFSG --
> such clauses are not legally binding.  We may want to add a more general
> clause, however, to reject licenses which claim rights which don't belong
> to the copyright holder.]

Maybe we should add a line to the DFSG similar to:

"Activities other than copying, distribution and modification must not be
covered by the license."

I am not sure how much licenses we consider free would break, but it would
be worth investigating. Furthermore, we could always add exceptions.


"Rhubarb is no Egyptian god."        Debian GNU/Linux        finger brinkmd@ 
Marcus Brinkmann                   http://www.debian.org    master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de                        for public  PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/       PGP Key ID 36E7CD09

Reply to: