Re: RE-PROPOSED: The Dictator Test
On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 12:28:24AM -0400, lex@cc.gatech.edu wrote:
> The closest I see is the mention of a fee in #1; a "restriction" might
> be construed as a "fee". However, if it is just about fees, there is
> no need for a new test.
DFSG#1 says "may not restrict". I believe the mention of fees is an example
of a restriction that "may not restrict" is intended to prohibit. Of course,
I don't think we should take it to an extreme, claiming that DFSG#1 doesn't
allow any restrictions of any kind; that's silly (not only would the GPL
fail--the BSD license would, too). I do believe that there are plenty of
non-free restrictions on distribution which are not "fees". For example,
"You may only redistribute this program on Monday" isn't a fee, but it's
clearly (I hope!) a non-free restriction.
> Good question. I actually am not convinced the dictator test even
> describes non-freeness accurately. I would be okay, for example, if the
> license says you must smile when you upload a new version, but since
I would. A free license has no place telling me to contort my face, yell "I
am He-man", smell a flower, run a marathon, flip off my boss, or any other
ridiculous, irrelevant and pointless things.
--
Glenn Maynard
Reply to: