Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge
Francesco Paolo Lovergine dijo [Sat, May 01, 2004 at 11:40:08AM +0200]:
> > To adapt an analogy that someone used earlier, when you go to a store,
> > you might find fonts, images, or other data in a box in the software
> > section. However, you are not likely to find a specification for
> > TCP/IP in the software section, and you are not likely to find a print
> > of Starry Night in the software section either.
> Ah that's an interesting point. TCP/IP is a standard, so it's non free...
> Maybe all implementation of that should go in contrib so, because
> they 'depend' on a piece of 'something' which is not free. So, we
> have to move the whole kernel there, and oh sure, libc too...
> Probably someone should clarify me better what's 'depending' means,
> why a document which define a standard is non-free but
> a program based on that standard is not in contrib? Who wrote that
> program did read the standard and use it to write the program.
> So, the program indeed _depends_ on that standard. And the standard IS
> the document which describe it. So there's a direct dependency.
> And POSIX? Mmmm...
Exactly, it seems you understood this perfectly. The standard
documents defining TCP/IP and POSIX are non-free. Take a look at them
, you will find that many of them say that 'distribution of this
memo is unlimited' or similar statements. Of course, arbitrary
modification is _not_ allowed (need I explain why? :-) After all, the
documents are a published standard, not something to play on). They
are _not_ DFSG-free.
Now, about implementing them... You can implement them freely, and put
your implementations under a DFSG-free license.
Gunnar Wolf - email@example.com - (+52-55)5630-9700 ext. 1366
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF