Re: Analysis of the Free Art License 1.3

On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:55:44 +0530 Mahesh T. Pai wrote: > Francesco Poli writes: > > > This might forbid anonymous works or anonymous modifications, > > which is non-free, IMO. > > Why so? Which is the part you're asking clarifications about? If you are asking "why might this forbid anonymo

Re: Analysis of the Free Art License 1.3

paiva...@gmail.com (Mahesh T. Pai) writes: > Francesco Poli writes: > > > This might forbid anonymous works or anonymous modifications, > > which is non-free, IMO. > > Why so? I believe http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html#dissident> applies. -- \ “In the long run, th

Re: Analysis of the Free Art License 1.3

Francesco Poli writes: > This might forbid anonymous works or anonymous modifications, > which is non-free, IMO. Why so? >> specify to the recipient where to access the originals (either >> initial or subsequent). > > This condition is a little improved with respect to the >correspondin