Re: OSD && DFSG convergence
Russell Nelson <email@example.com> writes:
> > but a click-wrap implementation is not a mere license notice, but
> > a fair bit more, isn't it?
> The current state of the art, in terms of ensuring license compliance,
> says that you have to ensure that both parties realize that they're
> entering into a contract, and you have to make sure that there is a
> manifestation of assent. There has to be some act towards which you
> can point saying "We told them that if they did X, they agreed to a
> contract, and they did X, so they must have agreed."
Right. That's for licenses which are contractual. Free software
licenses are unilateral grants of permission, for which it is
unimportant to certify acceptance.
If they don't accept, fine! They don't accept--and then they are
restricted by the copyright law (NOT by the license) and any further
copying is then illegal.
> I think the DFSG shouldn't allow a license to impose a requirement for
> a GUI, but neither can I see any place in the DFSG which clearly
> prohibits it. That's why we added term #10 to the OSD.
A license cannot restrict (unreasonably) the modification of the
software. We (Debian) are the sole determiners of what counts as
reasonable, precisely because the DFSG are our internal guidelines,
and not some kind of test which we are obligated to apply to any
license that matches. We have guidelines, not a "definition".