Re: Re: DRAFT: debian-legal summary of the QPL
>Er, this quote from Brian seems to have turned the dissident test on its
>head. It's not about protecting dissidents from copyright infringement
>claims at all, it's about protecting them from being *drawn and quartered*
>by their government as a byproduct of complying with the license. The
>problem with the QPL is that it allows a government that monitors all
>international correspondence to identify and murder those dissidents who
>are complying with the license.
Well, if they really do that, it is not the dissidents obeying to the upstram
request to provide sources, but already upstream contacting him to place the
request in the first place which is putting him in danger. And before upstream
can place the request, he needs to know about the modification, which means
the dissident already somehow breached his privacy and informed the world
about the patch.
And no, a public call on TV doesn't count, since there is no way you can prove
that said dissident or even the desert island ihabitant, has actually seen it.
I suppose a legal receivable request would be either a plain letter send in
such a way that you have proof of distribution, or a asking through a court or
something, in which case the privacy is lost anyway.
And if you find a way the request can reach the dissident without compromising
its privacy, it would be hypcricy to not extend the same way for the sending
of the source to the requester.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: