On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 20:36:50 -0700, "Gregor Richards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Mark Rafn wrote: > > > I'd like to encourage you to think less along the lines "it's > > currently a web server, so the license should cater to that case" and > > more like "people should be able to make things out of this that I > > haven't thought of, using methodologies yet undreamt". This can't > > happen if you're prescribing things like network protocols, output > > text, or specific behaviors. > > > > If I can't turn it into a random-number service that runs on my phone > > over some crazy bluetooth RPC mechanism, it ain't free. > > > I've been considering this, and have written a completely different > clause, with no mention of computer networks, HTTP, or anything such. It > might, however, be more difficult to enforce. I tried to write it in > such a way that giving somebody SSH access to your computer does not > necessitate providing source for all of your programs under this license > ... that was the hardest part, and makes it read a bit kludgely. > I doubt that it is compliant with the Dissident Problem by your opinions > (< plural your), but I think that it's well within line of all of the > other requirements, and as an added bonus isn't tied to any particular > technology. > This would not be 2(d), but a new clause between 3 and 4. > > > If you provide to a person or persons a means of accessing an > interactive interface to the Program which does not include access to > the source code, object code or executable, you must also provide to > that person or those persons (henceforth called "Indirect Users") access > to the complete source code of the Program in one of the following ways: > a) Cause the Program to provide its source code in said interactive > interface upon the request of an Indirect User; or, > b) Make a means of immediate retrieval of the Program's source code > easily visible to all Indirect Users; or, > c) Provide a written offer, easily visible to all Indirect Users and > valid for at least three years, to give to any third party, for a charge > no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a > complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be > distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium > customarily used for software interchange. > > Thoughts? > > - Gregor Richards > > PS: While it would be great for me if I could find some way to get a > license with some provision like this considered DFSG free (nothing is > impossible! ;) ), I would also like your opinions on whether you think > that this would cause any undue harm besides non-DFSG-compliance > (unnecessary trouble for innocent users, etc) > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Damn ... I just posted the email address that I was hoping not to get posted on line. That sender is me, I'm that sender, and damn it, there is now going to be a link to my email address for all spam bots to read >_< /me slaps himself in the head. - Gregor Richards -- Gregor Richards [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.fastmail.fm - I mean, what is it about a decent email service? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
