debian-legal is not for license experimentation (was: DFSG-freeness of any license that fixes the ASP loophole)

[Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au>]

Shriramana Sharma <samjnaa@gmail.com> writes:

> Anyway, you have not said whether the clause I proposed would itself
> make a work non-DFSG-free.

As has been pointed out in the past when you tried this: The
debian-legal list is not a resource for experimenting with creating
hypothetical new licenses and clauses. We have enough work with the
*actual* license terms on *actual* software works proposed for Debian.

Anyone considering creating a new license, and who is still testing
clauses "for DFSG-freeness", is strongly advised to instead choose a
license that has undergone much more troubleshooting and that already
has broad use in Debian packages.

-- 
 \          "Jury: A group of 12 people, who, having lied to the judge |
  `\       about their health, hearing, and business engagements, have |
_o__)                        failed to fool him."  -- Henry L. Mencken |
Ben Finney