On Sat, 2011-03-19 at 18:27 -0400, Les Orchard wrote: > This is where I fail at being a lawyer, but I think that's as far as > it goes. I suppose if a company's legal counsel really wanted to be a > jerk and make a point, they could try drumming up some form of > "hacking" charges against someone.
In the case of Twitter, if your program is issued a key (a "Consumer key and secret") then you have promised to impose certain restrictions on the redistribution of your program. What it looks like to me is that most of the useful things you would want to do to interoperate with these services require a key, and a key is issued only after entering into a contract making promises about your program that are incompatible with free software licensing. (Though, yes, I'm not a lawyer either -- I'm just saying what my best understanding is.) -t _______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
