On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 7:28 AM, Miriam Ruiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So, everything is pointing towards this situation: > 1) The program must somehow inform the other user that the source code > is available, which might be quite hard depending on the communication > protocol. > 2) The source code must be put in a more or less stable server, with > the cost associated to that, because you cannot trust the current > network link to be enough to fulfill the requirements of the license. > 3) The user cannot remain anonymous.
In the case of point #3 that you're making here, are you saying that the AGPLv3 fails the dissident test? "Consider a dissident in a totalitarian state who wishes to share a modified bit of software with fellow dissidents, but does not wish to reveal the identity of the modifier, or directly reveal the modifications themselves, or even possession of the program, to the government. Any requirement for sending source modifications to anyone other than the recipient of the modified binary---in fact any forced distribution at all, beyond giving source to those who receive a copy of the binary---would put the dissident in danger. For Debian to consider software free it must not require any such excess distribution." -- Chris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
