Scripsit Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 02:16:35PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > These are three non-solutions with respect to the freedom to make > > arbitrary functional modifications to the work - which lies that the > > very core of the DFSG. > Given that "arbitrary functional modifications" would include illegal > activities It does. A license that tries to incorporate "you must follow the law" clauses is non-free. That is a longstanding and clear consesnsus on d-l. > I don't think that "arbitrary functional modifications" is a very accurate > representation of what the DFSG is really trying to allow for. I think you're badly wrong here. -- Henning Makholm "Nett hier. Aber waren Sie schon mal in Baden-Württemberg?"