Dmitry Alexandrov <321...@gmail.com> writes: > May I ask again, what law (what jurisdiction) are you talking about.
I am being deliberately non-specific about jurisdiction, and limiting the above assertions to those that describe law regardless of jurisdiction. > I am not familiar with North American laws, but there *is* a law > prohibiting distribution of DRM-circumvention tools, for instance, in > the Ukraine […] Yes, exactly: it is a *specific action* (distribution) that is restricted, not the object. Thank you for providing a specific example of law that does not make *objects* illegal, but *actions* by persons. Which is why I'm pointing out that it can only make sense to talk about what *actions* the law restricts. The tool is not legal or illegal, it is what a person may do that is restricted. So, the questions to ask for a proposed work in Debian are all about those restrictions on actions. What actions by Debian recipients are restricted by the specific conditions on the work, and do those restrictions constitute violation of DFSG? What actions by the Debian Project are restricted by specific laws? Do those restrictions exclude redistribution of the work by the Debian Project at all? Do those restrictions allow redistribution, but exclude the work from Debian? -- \ “[On the Internet,] power and control will shift to those who | `\ are actually contributing something useful rather than just | _o__) having lunch.” —Douglas Adams | Ben Finney
