Re: Termination clauses, was: Choice of venue
Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> wrote:
>The patent situation is thrust upon us; we can't avoid it. That doesn't
>imply that we should allow clauses which create more such situations,
>allowing termination at any time according to the author's mood and whim.
Why not? Again, what practical difference does it make to our users?
>The "Tentacles of Evil" test enunciates the need for this better (FAQ 9 A c):
>
>"Imagine that the author is hired by a large evil corporation and, now
>in their thrall, attempts to do the worst to the users of the program:
>to make their lives miserable, to make them stop using the program, to
>expose them to legal liability, to make the program non-free, to
>discover their secrets, etc. The same can happen to a corporation bought
>out by a larger corporation bent on destroying free software in order to
>maintain its monopoly and extend its evil empire. The license cannot
>allow even the author to take away the required freedoms!"
Yes. Why does the test say this? Which aspect of the DFSG is represented
by this test?
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.legal@srcf.ucam.org
Reply to: