Re: KDE not in Debian?

[David Johnson <djohnson@acuson.com>]

Joseph Carter wrote:

> > Section 6c, which talks about giving a copy to Troll Tech, only applies
> > to section 6, which is concerned with distribution. Basically, if and
> > only if you distribute such a program, then Troll Tech also gets a copy
> > if they ask. The QPL is completely silent on personal uses, disallows
> > "private" distributions, and is hunky-dory with public distributions.
> 
> Troll Tech indicates it is their intention to catch people who are not
> distributing code to cough up a copy.  Stark contrast to what you claim
> here.  Their intent seems to be about 9/10 of what a license on a piece of
> software means in the US at least, based on what little case law there is
> on the matter.

The only thing I am claiming is what is written in the license, since I
have nothing else to go by. But I am curious, how do they intend to find
out which people are not distributing code? How could they possibly
know? I think what they are attempting to do with Section 6c is to
eliminate "private" distributions. The Corel beta test comes to mind.
IMHO, it's a lot less irksome than those freeware licenses that say "for
personal use only."

David Johnson