On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 05:39:07PM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote: > > > The notable practical problems I'm alluding to would include: > > - All Debian mirrors must retain source packages one year after the > corresponding binary packages are deleted
The license does not require this because on all our mirrors the transparent copy is always along with the opaque copy. > - Debian CD vendors must either ship source CDs to all customers > regardless of whether a customer wants them, or maintain their own > download mirrors. Do you know how many Debian CD vendors ship the binary CDs together with written offer valid for at least three years, to give any _third party_, for a charge _no more_ than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code. For the CD vendors the requirement of GPL can be even more impractical than the requirement of GFDL and as a result they always ship the source CDs. > - Neither Debian, nor the mirror network, nor the users, can use > rsync-over-ssh to update their CD images or individual packages. You can use any way to update the CD images or individual packages because by doing so you are not controlling the reading and furthure copying. Everybody who receives the data is free to read and copy it. If I do not give you access to read some file then I am controlling you, not your reading - there exists no reading I can control. I would be controlling your reading if the copy I gave to you was protected in such a way that you could read it today but not tomorow. Anton Zinoviev -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]