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

Re: GPLv3 / Affero / RPSL



On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 08:48:13PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I think we have two sorts of free licenses. One set, which includes BSD
> and GPL licenses, which basically give users and authors the same rights;
> and the other set, which includes the QPL and licenses with patch clauses,
> which give the original author special consideration. I can't see any
> reason not to put licenses that require sending copies to the author
> into the second category -- free, but deprecated.

Just so my cards on the table, I don't like the practice of giving
authors special consideration.  Furthermore, I think the most effective
way -- perhaps the *only* effective way for our "deprecation" of such
licenses to be more than just lip service is to reject them as violating
the "spirit" of the DFSG, or if you'd rather, as violating Social
Contract clause 1 even if the DFSG wasn't comprehensive enough to snag
them.

And no, I don't have any expectation that everyone else on this mailing
list shares my opinion on this issue.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |    The first thing the communists do
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    when they take over a country is to
branden@debian.org                 |    outlaw cockfighting.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |    -- Oklahoma State Senator John Monks

Attachment: pgpGqKHimo6sF.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: