Re: [prePROPOSAL] DFSG (draft 7)

[Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>]

On Fri, Feb 19, 1999 at 12:09:31AM -0800, gecko@benham.net wrote:

> > >      Anyone must be able to use the software in any way without
> > >      paying a fee or royalty or performing any special actions.
> >
> > "or performing any special actions" is too vague. what's a special
> > action? installing the software?
> >
> > how about changing that to something like "...or incurring any other
> > obligation as a result of the license".
>
> Point taken but the suggestion is... well, this should be read by
> someone with a grade school education.  Some of the people reading it
> might not have a good grasp of the English language (ie. English as a
> second, third or fourth lang.)
>
> how about "...able to install and use the software..."?

doesn't remove the vagueness of "performing any special actions".



> > > 2.5. Distribution
> > > -----------------
> > >
> > >      Anyone must be able to give away or sell copies of
> > >      the software and sources without paying a fee or
> > >      royalty. However, nobody can be required to distribute the
> > >      software. This includes modified or derived work.
> >
> > this possibly conflicts with the GPL. the GPL requires you to
> > distribute/make available the source code for X years if you have
> > ever distributed a binary.
>
> Covered in section 3.

yeah, i saw that - i think it conflicts with 2.5. a document shouldn't
be self-contradictory...any exceptions should be listed when the rule is
first defined.

could be fixed by adding changing it to something like "...However,
nobody can be required to distribute the software (see exception in
3.x)..."

craig

--
craig sanders