Re: DRAFT: debian-legal summary of the QPL
Josh Triplett <josh.trip@verizon.net> wrote:
>Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> Why is it necessary for a free software license to support certain
>> business models, especially when (say) the GPL prevents certain other
>> business models?
>
>The restriction in the GPL prevents you from taking away the rights of
>others; the restriction in the QPL allows the copyright holder to take
>away _your_ right to privacy. See below.
The restriction in the GPL takes away *my* "right" to not have to share
modifications; the restriction in the QPL prevents me taking away the
rights of the copyright holder to see my modifications. You're not
providing arguments for why one of these viewpoints is better than the
other. I'm especially unconvinced that my right to privacy is stronger
than the right of everyone to enjoy my modifications.
>> People keep saying this, but nobody's said *why*. It's been pointed out
>> how the lack of this hurts certain people, but many license provisions
>> that we're entirely happy with hurt other people.
>
>That's far too general a statement. Figure out _who_ is being hurt by a
>given license provision, and then decide if we should care:
>
>* The GPL's copyleft hinders people who want to write GPL-incompatible
>software based on the GPLed software. In the vast majority of cases,
>this consists of people who want to write proprietary software.
The GPL makes it illegal for me to provide copies of GPLed source to
others in hostile patent environments. That's certainly hurting people
we want to care about.
>* The QPL hinders people who want to write software that is not
>publically distributed, even if that software is Free Software.
I'm still not sold on why a requirement to provide source back upstream
is a significant hinderence. The only people it hurts are people who
don't want to share with the rest of the community.
>To me, being required *to* distribute the software seems as bad as being
>required *not to* distribute the software.
Sigh. Yes. People keep saying that. Repeatedly. And then saying it
again. But nobody actually seems willing to say why. The set of people
being hurt is not obviously less deserving of that pain than people who
are hurt by clause 7 of the GPL.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.legal@srcf.ucam.org
Reply to: