Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> writes: > On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 10:22:26AM -0400, Michael Stutz wrote: >> The DSL is a license that already exists for this purpose: >> http://dsl.org/copyleft/dsl.txt >> >> It is a copyleft license that can be used for any kind of work, as >> recognized by copyright law. In particular, it has been used for >> published books. > > I'll take a closer look at it, but at first glance I don't like this: > > 6. ACCEPTANCE. > > Copying, distributing or modifying the Work (including but not > limited to sampling from the Work in a new work) indicates > acceptance of these terms. > > The only thing that can indicate my acceptance of a contractual > agreement is my signature. > > You might as well say, "Going to bed at 10PM indicates acceptance of > these terms." > > You do not have the right under copyright law to unilaterally dictate > the terms of my acceptance of your license. > > More to the point, I can copy, distribute, or modify the Work under > certain conditions due to Fair Use exceptions to copyright irrespective > of your assertions to the contrary. How is this different from GPL 5: 5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it. Especially when you look at DSL 2, and its references to fair use copying. I don't think this license is exactly what you're looking for anyway: its definitions of "preferred form for editing" look like they have similar intent to what's been discussed for a DFCL, but don't define things well enough. -Brian -- Brian Sniffen bts@akamai.com
Attachment:
pgp6l8hvSPbM8.pgp
Description: PGP signature