On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 07:25:09PM +0100, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote: > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > Anyway, there's a third chance of getting 6c past debian-legal, which > > > > > someone brought up in a different thread and which might be the > > > > > strongest yet: > > > > > > > > > > (3) Claim that the rights granted in section 3 of the QPL are > > > > > sufficient to make the software free so there is no need to even look > > > > > at section 6. > > > > > > > > No, since they apply to two different things. QPL 3 and 4 is for > > > > modifications > > > > of the original software, while QPL 6 is for applications linking with > > > > the > > > > software. > > > > > > I'm surprised to see you dismiss so readily what is potentially your > > > strongest argument, but perhaps it's a trick to make me argue your > > > > No, because i honestly believe that the QPL makes this modified work/linked > > work distinction, so you can't use this case. > > Do you think that the QPL without section 6 is a free software > licence?
I am tentatively in favor of that, yes. I believe the remaining questions are upto what point the pro and contra arguments will be weighted, but more on this in a few days when i will make another summary. > If YES, how do you argue that section 6 detracts from the permissions > granted by section 3? They do not, since they apply to two different clases of software. QPL 3 speaks about modifications of the original software, while QPL 6 speaks about software whose sole link to the original software is that it links with it. Both are derived works, naturally, or the point would be moot. > If NO, how do you argue that the language of section 3 excludes the > kind of derived work that is permitted by section 6? Same response as above. No my turn to ask you a question. I now repeteadly mentioned the distinction above, how it is written in the licence in multiple places, and how the wording of the QPL 6 header confirms this. What is your argumentation to ignore the above and makes as if modified work and linked works are one and the same thing ? Friendly, Sven Luther
