Brian Thomas Sniffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> At which point it becomes non-free. Or is it your belief that it should >> never be possible to turn a free license into a non-free one? The GPL >> contains a clause that explicitly allows for that to happen. > >No, it doesn't. It terminates only a license I'm already violating. >At that point, what do I care?
Read GPL 7. >> What field of endeavour does a clause along the lines of "The copyright >> holder may terminate this license at any time" discriminate against? How >> does this field of endeavour fall under DFSG 6 without it being read in >> an extremely broad fashion? > >Lots of them. Nuclear power plants, for example, or commercial >distribution. How, you say, when it doesn't mention them? Because >it's got a arbitrary rewriting clause written in. At some point, the >licensor can say, "By the way, I terminate the license for all nuclear >power plant operators," and from that instant on the operators are in >violation. No, by that argument means it discriminates against all fields of endeavour. Were the copyright holder to terminate the license of a specific subgroup, it would then discriminate against a particular field of endeavour. At that point, it would be unambiguously non-free. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
