[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes: > Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Folks who are providing an ASP-style service generally are going to >> have big web servers and lots of bandwidth anyway; I'm not convinced >> that distribution of source would be a significant burden for them. > > But the proposals for "closing the loophole" apply not only to the big > nasty people with the wide pipes, but also to the people, who, say, > stripped out the source-downloading feature because they are over a > satellite link to Antartica, and the changes were published anyhow in > the lab back in Chicago. Yes. Which is why I didn't end my message with the bit you quoted, and went on to talk about such folks. And for what it's worth, I've never advocated the Affero bit (i.e., the quine-like functionality). I think that the only way the requisite flexibility can be maintained would be to describe the need (and permissible mechanisms) to provide source in the license text. -- Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03