[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, Don Armstrong wrote:
> 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.

Just to underline this some more in case it's still not clear why this
is a fee, or even why if not it should not be allowed for licences in

This clause is on the continuum of clauses that ends in clauses like
"in any court action concerning this license you automatically lose."

Whether you agree with the fee argument or not, such clauses have no
business being in main because by using software under such a license
you either give up rights that you had or at least potentially give
them up. When you are ceding rights, interest, money, or other
intangibles to the licensor or original author, you are paying them
for using their software in a form of currency.

Don Armstrong

If I had a letter, sealed it in a locked vault and hid the vault
somewhere in New York. Then told you to read the letter, thats not
security, thats obscurity. If I made a letter, sealed it in a vault,
gave you the blueprints of the vault, the combinations of 1000 other
vaults, access to the best lock smiths in the world, then told you to
read the letter, and you still can't, thats security.
 -- Bruce Schneier

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

Reply to: