Re: reiser4 non-free?
On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 11:10:32AM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
> The Anti-Plagiarism License
[...]
> with the following modification: you may not modify, remove, or obscure any
> credits in the software unless your modification causes those credits to
This licence would benefit greatly from a definition of "Credits".
Considering that there have already been misunderstandings about Ads vs
Credits (which you attempt to dispel in the FAQ, but which confuse me
further), and different ideas about what exactly is a credit, you really do
need to tighten that up somewhat. Yes, you can "ask the author", but if
this licence becomes widely used, can you imagine asking the author(s), for
every new version they release, what the credits are? Do you really want
N+1 distributions all e-mailing you for every release with their credits
questions?
You could go GFDL and define the exact wording of your desired credits in
the licence, but then it would involve a licence change to change the
credits -- which if you've got parts licenced by different people under a
particular form of credits in the work, will require a new licence grant by
them, unless you word the licence in such a way that new credits can be
added to the licence without mucking up old ones.
> Q: Can we the distro preserve the credits but send the credits to /dev/null.
>
> A: No. How can you even ask such a question?
Q: Can we the distro send the credits to another virtual console other than
the one the user is currently looking at?
Likely Answer: No. How can you even ask such a question?
Actual answer: ???
Q: Must we then force the user to stay on the virtual console which the
credits are displayed until the notice has finished displaying?
Likely Answer: No.
Actual Answer: ???
Q: Where is the limit between displaying the credits where the user won't
necessarily see them, and forcing the user to read them?
Likely Answer: Umm...
Actual Answer: ???
These are all "line in the sand" questions which need to be answered. If
distros are desiring to re-brand you (or rather, your contibutors) out of
the equation, they will likely be looking for where the line is, and how far
they can redraw it in their favour while you're not looking. I'd imagine
that if you don't embed the line in concrete and bolt it down, it'll end up
somewhere you don't expect. So you really have to tighten up your wording.
I'm not against what you're trying to accomplish - I like to be attributed
for my work, too. I've never noticed any instances where I've not been
properly attributed in my work on an OSS project, and in fact I've been
surprised several times by the prominence others have given my name for work
I have done.
I've relied on human kindness thus far, and it's worked pretty well for me,
so perhaps my naivete is showing a little... That being said, as far as I
know my work doesn't form a fairly important part of *any* distribution
(Debian or otherwise).
There's something I haven't seen answered in this thread or the other
recurring ones on the same topic: have you ever actually made a formal
request to any of the distributions which have butchered your credits to
reinstate them? If so, what was the response? If not, why not, especially
since you advocate distributors asking authors what is appropriate?
- Matt
Reply to: