Re: Right to distribute modifications?

[John Cowan]

Bjorn Reese scripsit:

> Then what differentiates the right to distribute the software with
> modifications from, say, the right to use the software with
> modifications (which relates to the FSF's freedom 0), to warrant
> explicit caution?

Contracts are about trapping an agreement in a net of inherently
ambiguous words.  The more explicitness, the better.  That's
why (common-law) lawyers tend to use multiple synonyms, like
"give and bequeath", "right, title, and interest", etc.
in the hopes that what one word doesn't capture, another will.

-- 
John Cowan   http://www.ccil.org/~cowan  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To say that Bilbo's breath was taken away is no description at all.  There
are no words left to express his staggerment, since Men changed the language
that they learned of elves in the days when all the world was wonderful.
--_The Hobbit_
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3

Re: Right to distribute modifications?

[Bjorn Reese]

John Cowan wrote:

> AFAIK the free software community has always understood the right
> to distribute modifications to be implied by this license, but
> of course (as usual) no court has spoken, and so nobody can say
> for sure.  RMS is being cautious, that's all.

Then what differentiates the right to distribute the software with
modifications from, say, the right to use the software with
modifications (which relates to the FSF's freedom 0), to warrant
explicit caution?
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3