Re: DRAFT: debian-legal summary of the QPL
On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 04:45:07PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 09:05:40AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> >
> >>Sven Luther wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 12:01:57PM -0400, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>luther@debian.org writes:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Well, simply configuring your SVN/CVS/ARCH/Whatever archive to spam upstream
> >>>>>with every change done should resolve all the issue. Or maybe giving him
> >>>>>consultation access would be enough.
> >>>>
> >>>>Spamming upstream is not enough. You have to provide one on request,
> >>>>even if you just sent one. Additionally, now you're suggesting doing
> >>>>away with the ability to make private modifications.
> >>>
> >>>Bullshit, you have provided it before it was asked, so where is the problem ?
> >>
> >>Do you see anything in the QPL that says the original developer can only
> >>request your changes once? They can ask twelve times a day if they
> >
> > Well, whatever is the problem ? You provide it to them, and if they ask you
> > again, you either say, sorry, i sent it to you already, and haven't got a
> > backup copy, would you like the latest version perhaps ? If you already
> > fullfilled the request before you are asked, where is the problem.
>
> >From the QPL:
> > c. If the items are not available to the general public, and the
> > initial developer of the Software requests a copy of the items,
> > then you must supply one.
>
> Where in there does it say that you may refuse to supply a copy if you
> have already provided one?
Where in it says you have to ? Please let's not forget common sense.
> >>want, and you have to comply; there is nothing in the license that says
> >>otherwise. For that matter, do you see anything in the QPL that says
> >>the original developer has to compensate you for the costs of providing
> >>your changes (bandwidth charges for network distribution, or media costs
> >>for physical distribution)?
> >
> > Yes, since the distribution will happen accordying to 6a, which says you can
> > charge for the cost of data transfer.
>
> >From the QPL:
> > c. If the items are not available to the general public, and the
> > initial developer of the Software requests a copy of the items,
> > then you must supply one.
>
> Where in there does it say that the copy you supply to the initial
> developer is covered by the terms of 6.a? 6.a only covers recipients
Well, it is evident. The section 6 covers how you distribute these code
linking with the library. IF you distribute such code, you have to cumply to
all of a, b and c, is it not ? You don't see in the main header of 6 that you
have to satisfy one or the other, or you could safely ignore 6c and the whole
point would be moot.
> who have a binary and want the source. In this case, if you are
> distributing source (that is not available to the general public), then
> the source is one of the "items" in question, and it must be provided
> under 6.c, which does not indicate that you may charge for cost of
> distribution.
Notice that 6c speaks about "copy of the items". How do you interpret this.
This has no meaning apart from the stuff described in the 6 header, that is :
You may develop application programs, reusable components and other
software items that link with the original or modified versions of the
Software. These items, when distributed, are subject to the following
requirements:
These items clearly refer to "application programs, reusable components and
other software items that link with the original or modified versions of the
Software", and this clearly states that you have to cumply with all of the
following, 6a to 6c.
> >>[Do you want both of your email addresses CCed on these mails?]
> >
> > Not really, but i prefer more of them than none at all, as hiting D is easier
> > than reading mail in lynx.
>
> No problem; I'll continue to CC luther@debian.org on all of my mails
> related to the QPL discussions.
>
> (Are you using webmail through lynx?)
I have no choice, since i was not originally CCed, i have to go to the web
archive to read the discussion, get the url of emails i want to respon, launch
lynx over ssh on the box which does mail processing, open the url, go to
respond to or whatever link and send the mail.
Now i have supposedly the followup set correctly in mutt, but this probably
makes me miss the followups not directly following one of my mails. Oh hell, i
will subscribe after all :(.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: