[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta

On Thu, 24 May 2007, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On May 24, Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> wrote:
> > This is not the case, unfortunatly, and it really would be wise in the
> > future to consult with people who are familiar with the arguments
> > surrounding such licenses before expressing Debian's opinion to the
> > FSF.
> Do you mean the ftpmasters, don't you?

If I had meant only the ftpmasters, I would have said so. That said, I
did point to a message written by Joerg (an ftpmaster) about this
particular license.

> > It's not appropriate for a Free Software license to require users of
> > software to give up rights that they would normaly have in their own
> > jurisdiction.
> But still, it's not forbidden by the DFSG.

The DFSG is a set of guidelines; there are many things that licenses
can do which would be anathema to Free Software but are not
specifically excluded by the DFSG. That said, the typical argument is
that giving up your right to have cases tried in your local venue is a
fee or royalty, and as such violates DFSG �1. If you put your mind
to it, I'm sure you can come up with others.

Don Armstrong

I shall require that [a scientific system's] logical form shall be
such that it can be singled out, by means of emperical tests, in a
negative sense: it must be possible for an emperical scientific system
to be refuted by experience.
 -- Sir Karl Popper _Logic of Scientific Discovery_ �6

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: