Re: RPSL and DFSG-compliance - choice of venue
On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 09:35:31PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
> DFSG. I fully agree with this. If you really truly believe that your
> interpretations are shared by the rest of the project, then you have nothing to
> fear from this, and you only stand to gain.
We fear that as soon as we special-case something in the DFSG it will be
used as a fulcrum for splitting hairs even finer. "Our special case isn't
banned by the DFSG, but these other ones are, so obviously the DFSG was
intended to be proscriptive, therefore our special case is free and our
gratuitously non-free licence should be permitted". AKA "The DFSG Arms
Race". We keep throwing GRs around every couple of months to say "this
sucks", and then someone who wants to play word games comes up with another
truly non-free licence clause which isn't covered by one of the special
cases in the DFSG.
That being said, I think there are a few items of wording that need to be
addressed (DFSG #1 in particular can be read a wide number of different ways
depending on one's desires), and one or two extra "wide sweeping" clauses
wouldn't go astray, but they need to be *very* carefully considered. Even
the wording changes would likely have an effect similar to the recent
"editorial amendments" GR.
- Matt
Reply to: