Re: Anti-TPM clauses
Shriramana Sharma wrote:
Olive wrote:
The persons who are entitled to take a decision (i.e. the ftp masters)
have decided that CC-BY-SA is free. Many people here say that
something is not suitable for main even though it has already been
decided otherwise by the persons entitled to take the decision. They
mistake their wishes for the reality and/or try to gain powers that
they have not. If it continues this way; the answers given on this
list might just be disregarded. It just the opinion of a small group
of people which have nothing to do with Debian but who dream they are
a jury of some court.
Though I agree with the FTP-masters that CC-3.0-BY(-SA) are free, I feel
your words are somewhat unjustifiably harsh. Everyone is entitled to his
say. Everyone has his own interpretation. Stating such an interpretation
does not constitute dreaming of power. Nobody is trying to gain any
powers here.
As for this list being disregarded, this list exists for the purpose of
discussion. If anyone did not have a right to voice their opinions on an
on-topic subject in a friendly manner, the purpose of this list would be
defeated, IMO. On a lighter note, I could say that it would make this
list conflict with DFSG #5.
Everyone can state his opinion, but it depend on the way you did it.
Members on this lists are free to discuss, express and defend their
opinions, whatever they are. But they might not claim (or let believe)
that they speak on the name of Debian and I have too often the feeling
some members misunderstand this.
Some people ask questions on this list as a given license is suitable
for main. They ask if Debian as an organization have decided something
and if not what it will likely decides. If it has already been validly
decided, as for CC-3.0-BY(-SA) (and if you know it); then you should
answer "yes" even tough you do not personally agree with the decision.
You may add that this is not your personal opinion and tell why.
Too often, I see people answering questions on this kind; giving their
own interpretation saying nothing about what have already been decided
as if their opinion would be the opinion of Debian. When someone objects
that this has already been decided by the ftp masters; they speak of a
"consensus" although this "consensus" is only a consensus among a very
few people on this list not representative of the Debian community and
not entitled to decide anything. They even says that this consensus
would have more value that the decision of the ftp masters (see the
answer of Ben Finney Tue, 11 Sep 2007 20:29:03 +1000); legally entitled
to judge. They insist that a GR-vote cannot decide the freeness of some
license (even though the text of the GR-vote say explicitly that Debian
consider some license free) just what Debian "will do"; letting believe
that Debian violates its own rules while it only violates their opinions
(see Ben Finney, Tue, 11 Sep 2007 23:25:46 +1000); while of course a
"consensus" on this list can decides (or discover) the freeness of some
license. This is the reason why I have said that some people try to gain
power that they have not. I mean it.
Olive
Reply to: