On Thursday, November 24, "Josselin Mouette" <j...@debian.org> wrote: > Actually, it is already widely accepted that the system > libraries exception does not apply to packages in Debian, > so a license that would be the same as the GPL but without > this exception wouldn't make a single difference for us.
I presume it'd still apply... but be satisfied because Debian already includes the source code for system libraries. > But it would make the hell of a difference for > Android/OSX/Windows, of course... I'm not sure how much of a difference it'd actually make to the majority of applications out there since they are already so well abstracted from the operating system. Even so, it doesn't have to be perfect. I presume that this restriction might effectively prevent application level installers on proprietary platforms, for example. > And because of that, overall I don't think it's a bad idea. The big downside that I see it would be a copyleft that is incompatible with current generation of GPL licenses due to the additional restriction. It may be a bit tricky to get correct -- I think simply removing the mention of System Libraries might be inadequate, you may have to amend to explicitly *include* them in the Corresponding Source. > But you'd have to convince a lot of people to use it, because > it only makes sense when applied to a killer application, and > you can’t know by advance which ones will be. If a free license that effectively discriminated against proprietary platforms existed, applications would follow, if only because it opens up dual-licensing options that are currently not viable. Best, Clark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1322240682.29271.140661003562...@webmail.messagingengine.com