On 7/10/05, Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 11:56:50AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > Maybe impractical, but so far I can't see why they should be non-free. > > Now you're claiming that an impractical license can be free? I think > your notion of what is "free" is so patently absurd that I can't be > bothered to argue with you--"we require the freedom to modify and > distribute, but license restrictions that make those freedoms impractical > to exercise are fine!"
Glenn, you said that "click-wrap" licenses are impractical and Marco agreed with you. You said nothing about the license contents. If you're wanting to take issue with Marco's agreement with your position that the "click-wrap" method of accepting a license is impractical, please keep in mind that the method by which a user agrees to a license has nothing to do with the contents of that license. I'm unclear how on the one hand you can say they are impractical (click-wrap licenses) and then call absurd someone's agreement with that contention. Can you please clarify this disconnect? -- Chris "With the way things are starting to go in this country, if forced to choose between being caught with a van full of pirated DVDs or heroin you'd actually have to pause and think about it." -- Michael Bell, drunkenblog.com
