Re: First draft of AGPL v3

2007-06-14 Thread Lasse Reichstein Nielsen
On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 16:13:30 +0200, Gervase Markham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: But surely the entire point in question is whether presenting the UI to someone across the network is conveying or not? GPLv3 says it isn't, AGPL says it is. Perhaps it would be better (in respect of this parti

Re: Request for GR: clarifying the license text licensing / freeness issue

2007-04-24 Thread Lasse Reichstein Nielsen
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 00:44:30 +0200, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm curious to know how you reconcile Social Contract §1 and DFSG §3, and the fact that we distribute non-modifiable texts in Debian. Easy. DFSG §3 talks about the software, and a license is not software - neither so

Re: A possible weakened rephrase of clause 5d [was: Re: GPL v3 Draft 3- text and comments]

2007-04-12 Thread Lasse Reichstein Nielsen
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 00:46:06 +0200, Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: OK, this is my attempt to rephrase clause 5d in a form that is weak enough to be less harmful than clause 2c of GPLv2: begin proposed text d) If the Program has interactive user inter

Re: Affero General Public License

2006-02-13 Thread Lasse Reichstein Nielsen
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 00:14:55 +0100, Benj. Mako Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Under this logic, copyleft is also a use restriction. It bars proprietary use of free software. Being proprietary is not an attribute of the use. It is a description of the exclusion of other uses than the mention