Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hrrm. We need a different clause then. > > "No program licensed under this License, which accesses a work, > shall require the authority of the copyright owner for that work, in > order to gain access to that work.
This is too broad. If I have a machine on the internet which is secured using GPL'd programs, I certainly do not give anyone and everyone the legal authority to see what is on the machine. That is the basic problem with these anti-DRM clauses: differentiating between DRM and legitimate privacy controls is basically impossible. > Accordingly, no program licensed under this License is a > technological measure which effectively controls access to any > work." Again, writing this sentence into the license doesn't make it true. It is decided by external factors, such as whether the people implementing the scheme know how to do decent crypto. Cheers, Walter Landry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
