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

Re: Anti-TPM clauses

Olive wrote:
non DFSG-free. Debian legal is only a mailing list to discuss licenses, by no means it is a tribunal that can take official decision. Only the ftp masters or a vote can decide litigious cases.

And whom do the ftp-masters themselves answer to? Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Debian is answerable to the public, you know.

That said, I agree with the FTP-masters on allowing CC-3.0-BY and CC-3.0-BY-SA.

I feel such anti-TPM clauses are meant like copylefting, to ensure that no recipient of a licensed work takes away the freedom of a further-downstream recipient. I also feel that such clauses should be interpreted in the *spirit* of the DFSG rather than the letter. And I feel that the spirit of the DFSG is in accordance with any attempt to prevent anything that is against freedom.

I don't know what was discussed previously on this list about this, but that's my Rs 2.

Shriramana Sharma.

Reply to: