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

Re: Referencing the DFSG [Re: DRAFT summary of the OPL; feedback requested]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
> Don Armstrong <don@donarmstrong.com> writes:
> > On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
> Perhaps [Bruce Perens] has a turing-complete compost heap as well?

Way, way, OT, but it's pretty hard not to have a compost machine that
does not contain universal turing machines.[1] (Hint: Think bacteria
and DNA.)

> Then what are you talking about?  If the section of the DFSG a
> license fails doesn't capture anything, why include that datum?

Just because a single section of the DFSG fails to enclose all of the
problems of a license doesn't mean that a a license does not violate a
section of the DFSG.

Regardless, I think there's a fundamental miscommunication here.

I'm suggesting the following:

"This clause of the license restricts modification (DFSG §3) because
... which was found to a modification restriction in debian-legal
thread (link to legal thread via lurker[2])"

instead of:

"This clause of the license restricts modification because ..."

I'm not proposing:

"Violates DFSG 3" (Even though I use this shorthand myself for
licenses that are trivially non-free.)

Don Armstrong

1: Yes, yes, my day job is molecular biology...
2: see http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/ -- links to it are
"permanent", whereas list.debian.org links currently move about as
spam is removed from the archive.
The attackers hadn't simply robbed the bank. They had carried off
everything portable, including the security cameras, the carpets, the
chairs, and the light and plumbing fixtures. The conspirators had
deliberately punished the bank, for reasons best known to themselves,
or to their unknown controllers. They had superglued doors and
shattered windows, severed power and communications cables, poured
stnking toxins into the wallspaces, and concreted all of the sinks and
drains. In eight minutes, sixty people had ruined the building so
thouroughly that it had to be condemed and later demolished.

-- Bruce Sterling, _Distraction_ p4


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: