Re: Bug#68652 acknowledged by developer (dosemu has clickwrap license)
On Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 09:10:29PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> On Aug 06, Brian Ristuccia wrote:
> > If the clickwrap license doesn't go away, dosemu should move to non-free.
> [...]
>
> Show me where the DFSG prohibits software from using clickwrap
> licenses.
It's a restriction on use rather than on copying. In the past, restrictions
on use have been found to violate DFSG #6. Also, in jurisdictions where one
can form a contract via a clickwrap, it's a requirement for an execution of
an additional license by the end user in violation of DFSG #7.
The license in the file file COPYING may allow Debian to modify dosemu to
remove the clickwrap license. If it does, I see no reason why not to since
clickwraps are annoying. Why not replace
By continuing execution of this programm, you are stating that you
have read the file COPYING and the above liability disclaimer and
that you accept these conditions.
Enter 'yes' to confirm/continue: yes
with something like
Press \n to continue.
> (Incidentally, *our boot floppies* display the license and
> require confirmation to continue... they don't specifically ask that
> you accept the license, but that's a moot point.)
>
Requiring the user to accept the license instead of just giving them an
opportunity to read the license makes a big difference. Having lawfully
aquired Debian, it can be argued that the end user is free to do with it as
he chooses even if he does not accept the license. Of course, without first
accepting the license he may not copy the software without infringing, but
this does not affect his ability to read or use the software. (Some might
argue that temporarily copying the program into memory in order to execute
it would constitute infringement if done without license from the copyright
holder but this is an extraordinarily weak argument - especially so in
jurisdictions where fair use is a defense for infringment)
--
Brian Ristuccia
brian@ristuccia.com
bristucc@cs.uml.edu
Reply to: