On Thursday 28 February 2008 04:09:34 pm Francesco Poli wrote: > On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 11:01:34 -0800 Sean Kellogg wrote: > > On Thursday 28 February 2008 10:19:26 am Walter Landry wrote: > > [...] > > > > http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html > > > > Now this is a page I remember... it is indelibly rooted in my mind > > because of this fun exchange: > > > > ------------------>8------------------ > > Q: I've flouted your advice and written a new license. I strongly believe > > that it conforms to the DFSG and is a free software license. People on > > debian-legal don't seem to agree though. They give explanations for their > > decision which I find completely unconvincing. I keep trying to explain > > the flaws in their reasoning to them, but to no avail. Is there any way > > for me to compel Debian to accept that my license is free? > > A: No. > > ------------------8<------------------ > > > > Nothing like being so sure of your own god-like status as to shutout > > debate and deny the existence of a very clear method to compel Debian to > > accept the license... it's called a GR and has been used in just such a > > situation (GDFL anyone?), much to the dismay of some -legal contributors. > > I have to disagree with you, here. > > A GR is *not* a method to compel Debian to do anything: it's a method > for the Debian Project to decide what to do in a given situation. But > nobody external to the Project (that is to say, no non-DD) can *compel* > Debian to do anything. It's up to the Debian Project to decide what to > do in a given situation. > A non-DD (like me, for instance) may persuade some DD to propose a GR: > *if* the GR is actually proposed, and *if* it is seconded, *then* it > will get voted upon; but the outcome will not necessarily correspond to > the initial hopes of the non-DD. The non-DD does not even have vote > right: hence he/she does not even have the opportunity to influence the > outcome of the GR (other than by persuasion). > Even a member of the Project (a DD) may propose a GR, but cannot compel > other DDs to second it or to vote as he/she desires. > > So to conclude, I think it is actually true that there's no way for > someone to *compel* Debian to accept a given license as "free".
The question being asked is "Is there any way for me to compel Debian to accept that my license is free?" and the answer is "convince a DD to propose a GR, get it seconded, and convince the sufficient number of DDs to support your proposal." I trust you will see how this is strikingly different from "no". The page makes it sound as if -legal is the final arbiter, which is simply untrue. The fact that the questioner cannot vote (assuming they are not a DD, which is not implied by the question) does not deny the existence of an avenue to compel, it simply means it requires the assistance of others to do so, which is the case with pretty much every activity I engage in every moment of every day. I cannot compel my neighbor to stop throwing his trash into my yard, but if I go to a judge and get an order for a police officer to do something about it, I very much doubt my neighbor is going to quibble over who, exactly, is doing the "compelling." On a related point, this sort of argumentation style that has us debating the meaning of "compel" is at the heart of the problems with the test. Folks seem to want to attach meaning to words that go well beyond a plain text reading--which is lovely and all--but isn't exactly fair to the others who don't agree with those definitional aspirations and really makes it challenging to objectively participate or evaluate previous arguments. -Sean -- Sean Kellogg e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
