Re: Referencing the DFSG [Re: DRAFT summary of the OPL; feedback requested]
- To: debian-legal <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: Referencing the DFSG [Re: DRAFT summary of the OPL; feedback requested]
- From: batist <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:20:11 +0100
- Message-id: <1079011210.6098.1.camel@Atana>
On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 06:54, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I think Jeremy's concerns about not reinforcing the meme of "DFSG as
> strict ruleset" are quite valid, but I think it serves people well if we
> cite the DFSG wherever applicable in our license analyses.
It is also common courtesy among lawyers to cite wherever you got the
mustard. First of all, just stating that some clause violates the DFSG
in general, would make any lawyer very wary. It makes it more sound as
it violates some vague, general principle that we hold dear, but cannot
enforce (at least, from a lawyers point of view).
Secondly, as legal work often involves a lot of paperwork, is it very
nice to cite the exact location, if possible even the exact sentence.
Though this is not really a big point concerning the DFSG (considering
its length), it would at least make someone unfamiliar with the DFSG
more inclined to check out one paragraph than a whole document.
And last of all, it's just a sign of professionalism. First impression
is oft a first judgement about the intrinsic quality. Compare the
outer/inner beauty problem. Polishing outer beauty will make the inner
beauty more visible.
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers"
Henry VI, part 2