Re: The Helixcommunity RPSL is not DFSG-free
>>>>> "tb" == Thomas Bushnell <email@example.com> writes:
tb> No, it wouldn't, because Chinese dissidents want to share the
tb> software with each other. That's distribution. But they
tb> don't want to have to advertise their activities to the
tb> Chinese government.
a. iff you modify RPSL code AND you don't distribute it, you don't have
to distribute your modification;
b. iff you modify RPSL code AND you distribute it to a set X of
recipients, you have to distribute your modifications to the very
same set X of recipients, and to no-one else;
That's what I meant (I admit I was completely unclear, sorry for
that). That's more or less what the GPL says, AFAICT.
I have still some doubts about the case where you use a modified
version of RPSL code to distribute "content", in which case it seems
to me that the RPSL obliges you to redistribute the modified source to
every recipient of the content. I suppose it doesn't buy much for
what Real is trying to achieve (from from I can gather, but of course
Rob's words on this issue are helpful) and is going to be incompatible
with case (b).
Andrea Glorioso firstname.lastname@example.org
Centro Tempo Reale http://www.centrotemporeale.it/
AGNULA/DeMuDi Technical Manager http://www.[demudi|agnula].org/
"There's no free expression without control on the tools you use"