Re: Contracts and licenses
> > Sending one email is not free for me, I pay $ per month to send email,
> > receive email, and browse web pages. There may be no incremental cost
> > associated with sending one email, but there is still a cost. (Therefore
> > it's not free, so I don't have to send one)
>
> True, but a license clause that is only non-free for some people is
> still non-free. There is probably at least one person in the world who
> has an Internet connection (and regularly-maintenanced computer, and
> electric bill, etc) paid for by someone else, and does not place a
> monetary value on their time, and therefore can send an email at no cost
> to themselves.
Aside from circular reasoning, why is this non-free? It costs nothing
to send it, and it does nothing to get in the way of the spirit of DFSG
which IMHO is all about having the source and being able to use it
freely.
> Furthermore, most real "send me an email" clauses don't
> include such a qualifier, and many actually require approval before
> distribution.
Granted. They are probably intended to be no-cost requirements, though,
and so I did my best to patch together one that will de no-cost even if
you are on a desert island or connect to the Internet via a network of
drum-beating monkeys. I suspect a real lawyer could do a good job of
it, even if I botched it somehow.
-Lex
Reply to: