On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 01:06:25 -0700 Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 12:56:50AM -0400, Walter Landry wrote:
> > Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> > > Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> > > >Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> > > >> Under the GPL, the government can just pass a law requiring
> > > >> that all distributed source code be provided to the government.
[...]
> > In that country, it would not be free.
>
> I disagree. This is not relevant to the freedom of the license,
> because it's an additional restriction imposed by a *third party* (in
> this case, a government), and not something that can be fixed by
> additional permission grants from the licensor.
Indeed. For a license to be free, it is necessary that the *license*
grants all the important rights and does not take away any right.
If another entity nukes one important right, it's not the license's
fault...
Consider a totalitarian regime in which anyone can be put in prison with
no reason: would free licenses become non-free in this country?
I don't think so.
--
| GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 | $ fortune
Francesco | Key fingerprint = | Q: What is purple
Poli | C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 | and commutes?
| 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 | A: A boolean grape.
Attachment:
pgpHxXVAiraUE.pgp
Description: PGP signature