On 15/11/23 at 00:49 +0000, Luca Boccassi wrote: > What do you think? Here's what I came up with: Hi, FWIW, I would likely second something along those lines. Some comments: > The Debian project however notes that not enough emphasis has been > employed in all parts of these regulations to clearly exonerate Free > and Open Source Software Projects from being subject to the same > liabilities as commercial products I find this part a bit ambiguous. When GitLab or Proxmox or RedHat sells services around a free software product, I think it's OK if they are covered by this regulation. Maybe it would be better with s/Projects/Organizations/? Maybe we should underline specific borderline situations where the impact of the regulation would be unclear? > , which has caused uncertainty and > worry among Free and Open Source Software developers and stakeholders. > > Therefore, the Debian project requests the legislators to enhance the (minor) s/requests/asks/? (can we request the legislators?) Lucas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature