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

Re: Desert island test

Ken Arromdee <arromdee@rahul.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, MJ Ray wrote about the bloody lunatic test:
> > In that case and if the lunatic is truthful, no software under the GPL is free
> > for 'you'.  However, that's the fault of the lunatic and not the software or
> > its licence.  IMO the correct bugfix is to cancel out the lunatic.
> I could equally use that reasoning for the mandatory redistribution case.
> No software under that license is free for you, but that's the fault of the
> situation and not the license.  The bugfix is to get off the island.
> It's pretty similar to the bloody lunatic test; the license says you
> can't distribute unless you follow some condition (distribute source/send
> changes off the island), but an external force having nothing to do with the
> author of the software forces you not to follow the condition.  Why is it
> the fault of the external force in one case and the fault of the license in
> the other?

One can spot whether it's the fault of the licence in 99% of problems
by asking whether a change to the licence could remove the problem.

A change to the licence could allow desert island hacking.

No change to the licence could stop the bloody lunatic.

Hope that explains,
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Reply to: