On Sat, 03 Jul 2004 23:55:23 +1000 Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-07-03 at 10:42, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Consider this sentence from the GNU Project's Free Software
> > Definition:
> > > It is also acceptable for the license to require that, if you have
> > >
> > > distributed a modified version and a previous developer asks for a
> > > copy of it, you must send one.
> >
> > Any software with such a requirement would be non-DFSG-free.
>
> So that's not an appropriate restriction, at least according to the
> DFSG?
True: it's not an acceptable restriction, from the DFSG point of view.
>
> What if it were just "must be emailed" - eg. if it were "must be
> posted" then the cost could be prohibitive for someone in the 3rd
> world right? But email, that should approach zero cost right?
I don't think it's a matter of cost, but rather a matter of being forced
to do something in case you previously performed a particular operation.
At least, it seems to me that the above requirement would fail the
desert island test[1].
[1] See <http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html> for details about
the desert island test.
--
| GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 | You're compiling a program
Francesco | Key fingerprint = | and, all of a sudden, boom!
Poli | C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 | -- from APT HOWTO,
| 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 | version 1.8.0
Attachment:
pgpUhFPvjZu6o.pgp
Description: PGP signature