Re: Contracts and licenses
"Lex Spoon" <lex@cc.gatech.edu> writes:
>> > Sending one email is not free for me, I pay $ per month to send email,
>> > receive email, and browse web pages. There may be no incremental cost
>> > associated with sending one email, but there is still a cost. (Therefore
>> > it's not free, so I don't have to send one)
>>
>> True, but a license clause that is only non-free for some people is
>> still non-free. There is probably at least one person in the world who
>> has an Internet connection (and regularly-maintenanced computer, and
>> electric bill, etc) paid for by someone else, and does not place a
>> monetary value on their time, and therefore can send an email at no cost
>> to themselves.
>
> Aside from circular reasoning, why is this non-free? It costs nothing
> to send it, and it does nothing to get in the way of the spirit of DFSG
> which IMHO is all about having the source and being able to use it
> freely.
It's a fee.
>> Furthermore, most real "send me an email" clauses don't
>> include such a qualifier, and many actually require approval before
>> distribution.
>
> Granted. They are probably intended to be no-cost requirements, though,
> and so I did my best to patch together one that will de no-cost even if
> you are on a desert island or connect to the Internet via a network of
> drum-beating monkeys. I suspect a real lawyer could do a good job of
> it, even if I botched it somehow.
I don't think so: either it doesn't require me to send an e-mail, or
in doing so is non-free.
--
Brian Sniffen bts@alum.mit.edu
Reply to: