On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 1:37 PM Bruce Perens <br...@perens.com> wrote:
> In addition, I think there's a principle here. Extension of copyright is > bad for Open Source, even if it helps us enforce our licenses more > effectively. It will always work against us to a greater extent that it can > be put to work for us. > You are not alone in this thinking. I've generally been opposed to the direction that the Affero license clauses took us, and believe that the discussion here is an extension of that harmful direction. This is what I wrote in 2008 on the subject: The GNU Affero General Public License and “DRM” http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/4977 -- Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition! http://l.c11.ca/ict/ "The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or portable media player from my cold dead hands!" http://c11.ca/own
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
