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

Re: Copyright verification needed

Le vendredi 29 juin 2007 à 19:50 +0200, Francesco Poli a écrit :
> > No. Section #6 only applies to components "that link with the original
> > or modified versions of the Software". It doesn't apply to derived
> > works.
> I am afraid I am not following you.
> Section 6c of the QPL v1.0 restricts your ability to privately
> distribute components "that link with the original or modified versions
> of the Software".
> You cannot opt out from this restriction, unless you refrain from
> developing such components.
> The DFSG require that you are able to develop such components, and the
> restriction is non-free.
> I cannot see how you can say that "the QPL is DFSG-free [...] if you
> don't apply section #6".
> How can you escape from the restrictions set forth in section #6?

By distributing the program as a "modification to the Software". It is
completely unpractical and implies distributing it as a set of patches,
but the DFSG allow this.

> | This license is governed by the Laws of Norway. Disputes shall be
> | settled by Oslo City Court.
> This is a choice of law *and* a choice of venue.

Sorry, I misread that one. Anyway I still don't think choice of venue to
be a problem for open source licenses, but that's another discussion.

(Oh, and don't misread me: even if by twisting the terms in the best
possible way the license can be seen as free, it is a really crappy

: :' :      We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `'       We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
  `-        our own. Resistance is futile.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

Reply to: