On Nov 22, Raul Miller wrote: > > it discriminates against people without regular internet access. > > > > Also, it effectively requires a fee for use, unless you consider the > > time of the person who uses it to have no value. [same issue.]
On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 09:50:36PM -0600, Chris Lawrence wrote: > It seems to be designed to protect users from being sued by anyone who > might have a right to the code (other than AT&T of course), since it > would be illegal for you to use the code if AT&T didn't have a valid > right to license it in the first place. Except that if you don't visit their web site you lose all rights to *use* the software. How are we going to guarantee that for people who install from cdrom without a net connection? I guess I can live with mild restrictions on development. People who modify the code need to carefully read the licenses for each piece of software they modify. But I can't see that there should be any per-package restrictions on use. That is discriminatory. [And, as an aside, I can see the advantage of building a free-software-developer oriented debian subset which consists of only software which can be combined with GPLed software -- without any restrictions beyond those allowed in the GPL.] -- Raul