On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 02:46:26AM +1100, Sam Johnston wrote: > >>The DMUP is a load of crap. > >> > >> > > > >Oh, and it has all the teeth of an amoeba > Why? Because it contains several clauses that are never enforced. That means "it breaks the DMUP" is clearly not grounds for disciplinary action (DSA doesn't *need* grounds for disciplinary action, so they don't appear to be concerned by this). There have been very few cases where anything along those lines have actually been done, and I can't actually think of any that were because of the DMUP (although I might be forgetting something). These ones in particular are ignored on a fairly regular basis, off the top of my head: Mirroring via any private means any portion of the public archives from the private servers is strictly forbidden without the prior consent of the residing Mirror Master. Do not run any long running process without the permission of the DSA's. Running servers of any sort (this includes IRC bots) without prior permission from the DSA's is also forbidden. You must not send via email any item which it is illegal to send or possess. You must not send (via email) or post Copyright material or Intellectual Property unless you have permission to do so. > What is it's lineage? A minimally edited copy of the Terms of Service for an ISP, IIRC. > Was it introduced improperly? Depends how you define "improperly". I think it was an arbitrary decree from a long time ago. DSA tend to ignore it, instead acting directly when they feel they need to do something (there have been arguments about that before now, but so far it has worked fine). > Looks like it > has teeth to me - certainly enough to solve this problem. I'd guess that you're just reading the document and assuming people pay attention to it. > Or does it > need to be revised and presented in a GR as a whole? Why bother? -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature