On Thu, 02 Nov 2006, Sean Kellogg wrote: > On Thursday 02 November 2006 23:11, Don Armstrong wrote: > > Since (or assuming) it actually is GPLed, you can totally ignore > > the clickwrap. Simply arrange[1] to have the code distributed to > > you simply under the terms of the GPL. [If it's not possible to > > ignore the clickwrap entirely, then it's not actually GPLed.] > > I don't see how you arrive at this conclusion. He's not asking if > the software is GPLed, he's asking if it is DFSG-free.
This may be what he's asking, but if so, it's the wrong question. Answering the "is this actually GPLed" question makes the DFSG freeness of the clickwrap moot. > Now, the fine folks at Edinburgh have gone one step further. They > have licensed their code under the terms of the GPL + some extra > verbage on warranty disclaimer and liability waivers. If you'd like > to make the claim that such disclaimers/waivers are in violation of > the GPL or the DFSG, then I'd be very interested to read them. If those extra disclaimers cannot be expunged/ignored by subsequent distributors, then you're not able to comply with the terms of GNU GPLv2, and as a result, you cannot distribute the work at all. [I should note here that v3 gets rid of this particular issue for warranty disclaimers, but it's not present in v2.] Don Armstrong -- An elephant: A mouse built to government specifications. -- Robert Heinlein _Time Enough For Love_ p244 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
