Re: DRAFT: debian-legal summary of the QPL

[Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> wrote:

>The theory here is quite simple.  You must not be forced to distribute to
>anyone who you aren't already distributing to.  Perhaps the dissident is
>distributing, morally and comfortably, through a secure underground
>network, but to contact the author, he would have to use insecure means
>traceable by his enemies.  He should not be morally obligated to do so. 
>*This* is the sort of thing the dissident test is about.

Then why does it not say so rather than using emotive arguments? The
cynical voice in me says something along the lines of "If it just said
'The license must not compel publication of modifications to anyone that
does not receive binaries' then it would sound more like a guideline
than a test and so would need to go through a GR to modify the DFSG",
but...

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.legal@srcf.ucam.org