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

Re: OSD && DFSG convergence

Simon Law writes:
 > 	Public domain software that is unlicensed does not have the
 > protection of copyright law.  Therefore, it is likely to meet all the
 > DFSG criteria.

How can it?  There is no license, so how can it meet #3 Derived Works?
I'm not being trivial and pointless here, I'm being careful.

 > > the DFSG does not prohibit a license from requiring a specific form of
 > > affirmative assent known as click-wrap.  Our recently-passed change to 
 > > the OSD fixes that problem.
 > 	I fail to see how a useful software license could be DFSG-free
 > and have a detrimental click-wrap license.  Perhaps you could provide an
 > example?

Here's an example, but more to the point, where in the DFSG does it
say that a license can't require click-wrap?


2.1(c) Whenever reasonably feasible you should include the copy of
this License in a click-wrap format, which requires affirmative
acceptance by clicking on an "I accept" button or similar
mechanism. If a click-wrap format is not included, you must include a
statement that any use (including without limitation reproduction,
modification or distribution) of the Software, and any other
affirmative act that you define, constitutes acceptance of the
License, and instructing the user not to use the Covered Code in any
manner if the user does not accept all of the terms and conditions of
the License.

-russ nelson              http://russnelson.com | You get prosperity when
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | the government does less,
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | not when the government
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | does something right.

Reply to: