Andrew Suffield writes: >On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 01:16:06PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> The debian-legal mailing list is often "bashed" because it repreresents >> an extreme point of view relative to Debian proper. > >Being interested in licensing issues is "extreme"? That's quite a >strange thing to claim.
And it's not what he's claiming at all, as you well know. debian-legal currently includes a large number of people who are on the more extreme end of the range of licensing opinions expressed within Debian. >> Many folks see debian-legal as "armchair laywering" from a position of >> ignorance. How many participants are attorneys? > >Who cares? Being an attorney does not give you any special ability to >interpret the DFSG. Also, turning the question around the other way: > >How many Debian developers are CS graduates and professional >programmers? How many AMs are qualified teachers? > >While these qualifications have their use, they aren't necessary >here. You don't have to be an attorney to understand the law, only to >practice it. But it's a great help in terms of understanding the meanings of lots of the *legal* license terms that are bandied about. And how they might be applied in court, with precedent. And in this case professional training is much more important than in the others you named IMHO. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Into the distance, a ribbon of black Stretched to the point of no turning back
