On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 09:17:51PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 12:23:35PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > >> Any situation which inhibits your ability to carry out any of the GPL's > >> requirements results in you no longer being able to distribute the code. > >> I still don't see how this is any less of a practical problem for > >> users than the copyright holder being able to terminate the license. > > > >I'm confused. Are you actually arguing that "the original author may > >terminate this license for any reason" clauses are DFSG-free? > > I'm arguing that I don't believe them to be obviously non-DFSG-free, > which is not the same thing.
It seems so obvious and self-evident to me that it's actually difficult for me to argue it. I'll try. It's a superset of every other restriction. The author may decide he doesn't really want people to modify the software, and terminate the license for everyone who does so; then he's saying "you can modify and distribute this software, but you can't actually do so". He might even wait a couple of years, letting people become strongly invested in the software before doing so. While one could interpret the DFSG to say "freedom to modify and distribute, unless the author changes his mind", I don't think such an interpretation is useful. It's certainly not in the spirit of the DFSG. I hope we don't need to hold a vote, or open this to the "wider audience" (perhaps "wider ambivalence") of d-devel for this. :) -- Glenn Maynard
