On Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 09:10:29PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote: > On Aug 06, Brian Ristuccia wrote: > > If the clickwrap license doesn't go away, dosemu should move to non-free. > [...] > > Show me where the DFSG prohibits software from using clickwrap > licenses.
It's a restriction on use rather than on copying. In the past, restrictions on use have been found to violate DFSG #6. Also, in jurisdictions where one can form a contract via a clickwrap, it's a requirement for an execution of an additional license by the end user in violation of DFSG #7. The license in the file file COPYING may allow Debian to modify dosemu to remove the clickwrap license. If it does, I see no reason why not to since clickwraps are annoying. Why not replace By continuing execution of this programm, you are stating that you have read the file COPYING and the above liability disclaimer and that you accept these conditions. Enter 'yes' to confirm/continue: yes with something like Press \n to continue. > (Incidentally, *our boot floppies* display the license and > require confirmation to continue... they don't specifically ask that > you accept the license, but that's a moot point.) > Requiring the user to accept the license instead of just giving them an opportunity to read the license makes a big difference. Having lawfully aquired Debian, it can be argued that the end user is free to do with it as he chooses even if he does not accept the license. Of course, without first accepting the license he may not copy the software without infringing, but this does not affect his ability to read or use the software. (Some might argue that temporarily copying the program into memory in order to execute it would constitute infringement if done without license from the copyright holder but this is an extraordinarily weak argument - especially so in jurisdictions where fair use is a defense for infringment) -- Brian Ristuccia [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
