On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 08:53:25AM -0700, Sean Kellogg wrote: > On Thursday 14 July 2005 12:56 am, Don Armstrong wrote: > > [Please retitle threads when appropriate... we've left the kde topic > > some time ago.] > > Technically true... but I'm still trying to make the argument that calling > the GPL a "License Agreement" is neither non-free nor a violation of the GPL > itself, as was the original bug's contention. The click-wrap argument is > just an offshoot of that original discussion.
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that, except possibly Arnt Karlsen, the original reporter who isn't participating in this thread. I think everyone agrees that #317359 is not a DFSG-freeness problem or a GPL violation, and is at most wishlist. I don't think there's any argument to return to. (It doesn't matter what you call it; you can call the GPL a "Ham Sandwich", and I can't see how that would be relevant to freeness or be a GPL violation. It's the text and requirements of the license that matters, not menu titles.) -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
