> On Saturday 23 July 2005 04:41 pm, Francesco Poli wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 00:03:56 -0700 Sean Kellogg wrote: > > > Anyone else have thoughts? > > > > Yes, I have one: > > | 3. The licensee agrees to obey all U.S. Government res- trictions > > | governing redistribution or export of the software and > > | documentation. > > > > That sounds non-free. > > Suppose I'm *not* a U.S. citizen[1]: why should I be bound to obey U.S. > > Government restrictions? > > > > [1] as I was born in Italy, *live* in Italy, and am an Italian citizen, > > this is actually the case! ;-) > > This is a difficult situation that is worth commentary. Assume for a moment > that the U.S. has some strict export restriction. As a U.S. citizen I am > bound by those laws and cannot legally violate them. Further, if I am to > distribute software it is entirely possible that the law prohibits me from > distributing that software to citizens of certain nations and to ensure those > who receive copies do the same. I don't think the law can really require that I "ensure" the behavior of those I distribute copies to; after all, it's a completely impossible requirement! I was always under the impression that I was simply not allowed to export them *myself*, or *encourage* others to do so. If the law imposes a positive requirement that I police the behavior of anyone I distribute the software to, that's pretty evil. I sure hope it doesn't do that.
> This means I have have a responsibility to ensure others don't distribute and > cause me to break the law. The only tool by which I have to do that is the > license. Not that that would work. If "ensure" were really the requirement, surely a clause in the license would be not nearly enough; you would presumably be expected to keep track of everyone you distributed it to, monitor their behavior, etc. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]