Re: GR idea related to ongoing licensing discussions
Russ Allbery <email@example.com> writes:
> For example, for the "desert island test" and part of the "dissident
> test", what about a GR with the following two ballot options:
> The DFSG are hereby amended to add the following additional guideline:
> 10. No Required Contribution of Changes
> The rights attached to the program must not depend on the user
> sending their modifications to any third party to whom they have
> not distributed the program.
This is not really a GR so I haven't wordsmithed this yet, but it occurred
to me just after posting it that this should say "to whom they have not
distributed or granted access to the program" (and probably could then use
some grammar cleanup). Otherwise, we prohibit various licenses that
require making the source available to anyone who runs the program, even
if one doesn't give them a copy (think of web applications, for example),
and I both don't think there's a project consensus against such licenses
and don't think that this would be the right place in the DFSG to address
them if there was.
Also, on another note, I didn't cc debian-legal on my original message
just because if people decided this was a horrible idea, I didn't want to
waste the time of more than one list, but any GR proposal clearly should
be cc'd there.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>