On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 03:50:24PM +1200, Adam Warner wrote: > Branden, perhaps the term "information disclosure" would better suit > you/us than "privacy"?
Sure, if that's agreeable to others. > That is we propose a DFSG-free licence cannot mandate information > disclosure of anything but the information forming a distributed and > derived work. Right. > I agree with Jeremy that I don't like using the idea of privacy as a > basis for the freedom. Not accepting licences that require mandatory > information disclosure seems much more concrete and exactly encompass > the consequences you set out in your initial post. Probably so, yes. -- G. Branden Robinson | Debian GNU/Linux | Ab abusu ad usum non valet [EMAIL PROTECTED] | consequentia. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
pgpdw2wmREOFq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
