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

Re: Is AGPLv3 DFSG-free?



On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:15:35 -0400 Arc Riley wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it>wrote:
> 
> > It says that I must offer "an opportunity to receive the Corresponding
> > Source of [my] version by providing access to the Corresponding Source
> > from a network server at no charge".
> > There's no indication that I can delay this opportunity at will, as in
> > "yes, to get source click here, but maybe you have to come back
> > tomorrow".
> 
> 
> If you setup a system which required a delay, that would be questionable.

I am not talking about an intentional delay.

I am talking about something like the following scenario:
the source-hosting server goes down, while I am on vacation on another
continent with intermittent access to Internet.  My personal copy of
the source is on my home computer which is down with the plug pulled
off.  My vacation has just begun and is going to last, say, five
weeks[1].  On my first Internet connection I receive an e-mail message
of a user (which is also one of the original authors of the network
application I modified!) who informs me that he/she could not download
the source of the modified network application.

Clearly, I am *not* going to immediately come back to the airport and
take the first flight home, in order to re-upload the source to another
server as soon as possible.

Am I failing to comply with the license?

[...]
> However, if the source is temporarily unavailable not by your intention or
> fault, then so long as you make a reasonable attempt to make it available
> (ie, somebody emails you to let you know the source server has been down, it
> doesn't come right back up, and you upload it to another server) you're
> still in compliance.

This is *your* (permissive) interpretation of the license.
It holds for works that are copyrighted by you.
Will other copyright holders agree with your interpretation, though?

Is there an official statement by the FSF that this is the intended
interpretation of the AfferoGPLv3?
If such statement existed, it would, at least, imply that this is the
"official" interpretation...


[1] I wish I could really have such long and distant vacations!  ;-)

-- 
 http://frx.netsons.org/doc/index.html#nanodocs
 The nano-document series is here!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpuQF83Rus1r.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: