Re: DRAFT: debian-legal summary of the QPL
Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>Would you argue that a requirement to send modifications upstream that
>>are not distributed at all would be Free? If not, then why should that
>>change if you distribute the software privately to one other person?
>
> No, since undistributed modification is protected by fair use in many
> places.
Not the US. (If it involves the creation of copies, as it does in all
software-related examples.)
> Attempting to restrict something that's commonly legal would be
> outside the bounds of a free license.
--
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Reply to: