Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > * MJ Ray: > > of clauses 4 (automatic donation to upstream), > [...] You retain your exploitation rights, you only > grant upstream a free license. This is just a form of copyleft, only > that the source license is granted to upstream, not the party that > receives the code.
Why does copyleft mean giving non-licensees a free licence? I thought copyleft meant future licensing needed to be under similar free terms. Why is free licensing of source to non-licensees not donation? > > maybe 5 (discrimination against fields of use) below. > > Debian should not protect the freedom to file software patents. If > the DFSG required this, we would have to change them. I think you are misreading the clause. It is not limited to software patents. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
