[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: DRAFT: debian-legal summary of the QPL

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 01:06:25 -0700 Steve Langasek wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 12:56:50AM -0400, Walter Landry wrote:
> > Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> > > Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> > > >Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> > > >> Under the GPL, the government can just pass a law requiring
> > > >> that all distributed source code be provided to the government.
> > In that country, it would not be free.
> I disagree.  This is not relevant to the freedom of the license,
> because it's an additional restriction imposed by a *third party* (in
> this case, a government), and not something that can be fixed by
> additional permission grants from the licensor.

Indeed. For a license to be free, it is necessary that the *license*
grants all the important rights and does not take away any right.
If another entity nukes one important right, it's not the license's

Consider a totalitarian regime in which anyone can be put in prison with
no reason: would free licenses become non-free in this country?
I don't think so.

             |  GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 |  $ fortune
  Francesco  |        Key fingerprint = |  Q: What is purple
     Poli    | C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 |     and commutes?
             | 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 |  A: A boolean grape.

Attachment: pgpRcDDzgS48R.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: