Re: DRAFT: debian-legal summary of the QPL
On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 10:07:55AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-07-23 08:47:42 +0100 Matthew Palmer <mpalmer@debian.org> wrote:
>
> >To be fair, there are two people arguing against the QPL being
> >non-free.
>
> I think there are more than that, but not all are helping to move
> things forward. ;-) In any case, it doesn't matter at this point what
> the numbers are. If their argument explains why a QPL-covered work
> follows DFSG and that isn't affected by the discussed problems, I hope
> most of us are humble enough to correct ourselves.
If I saw an argument which cleared up all of the concerns I had, I'd be more
than happy to acquiesce. I've already had my mind changed several times by
persuasive discussion in this thread, but there are still several problems
to worry about.
- Matt
Reply to: