Re: [OT] Droit d'auteur vs. free software? (Was: query from Georg Greve of GNU about Debian's opinion of the FDL
> > On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 12:37, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > > sub 2. The work must not be changed or made available to the public
> > > in a way or in a context that violates the author's literary or
> > > artistic reputation or character.
> * Anthony DeRobertis <firstname.lastname@example.org> [030501 12:56]:
> > So, I assume that if a work which has artistic or literary value is
> > licensed under the GPL, version 2, people living outside common-law
> > countries can't modify and distribute because of:
> > 7. [...] If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously
> > your obligations under this License and any other pertinent
> > obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the
> > Program at all.
On Thu, 1 May 2003, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> I cannot see the problem here. Even if the quoted "sub 2" can be
> applied, it may only disallow you making something available to
> the public (i.e. some forms of distributing it).
It says "changed _OR_ made available to the public". This restricts
private modifications as well. But even without that, the restriction on
"made available to the public ... in a context that violates the author's
literary or artistic reputation or character" is enough to prevent any
distribution under the GPL.
> The quoted "point 7" would only apply, if one wasn't allowed to
> distribute copies with source and allowing the receiver everything
> allowed by GPL. (As this are the mentioned obligations mentioned in
> the GPL).
Under droit d'auteur, you're not allowed to grant unqualified permission
to the reciever of a work to make modifications or to distribute the work.
You cannot fulfil the GPL requirements, so you cannot distribute the work.
> > /me wonders if there are more countries besides his own that need to be
> > no longer considered part of the free world. :-D
> Even extreme legislations for author's rights does not reduce the ability
> to create free software (though those rights might only performed in
> other countries), as long as law does not demand, that people have to
> encode laws in contracts they make.
This I heartily agree with. A work created in a droit d'auteur location
and released under the GPL is freely distributable and modifiable in a
common-law jurisdiction. It may be undistributable at all in it's home
It's a very strong reason for NOT accepting a license which attempts to
enforce these rights under common-law copyright.
Mark Rafn email@example.com <http://www.dagon.net/>