Re: is this free?
On Nov 22, Raul Miller wrote:
> > it discriminates against people without regular internet access.
> >
> > Also, it effectively requires a fee for use, unless you consider the
> > time of the person who uses it to have no value. [same issue.]
On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 09:50:36PM -0600, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> It seems to be designed to protect users from being sued by anyone who
> might have a right to the code (other than AT&T of course), since it
> would be illegal for you to use the code if AT&T didn't have a valid
> right to license it in the first place.
Except that if you don't visit their web site you lose all rights to *use*
the software.
How are we going to guarantee that for people who install from cdrom
without a net connection?
I guess I can live with mild restrictions on development. People who
modify the code need to carefully read the licenses for each piece
of software they modify. But I can't see that there should be any
per-package restrictions on use. That is discriminatory.
[And, as an aside, I can see the advantage of building a
free-software-developer oriented debian subset which consists of only
software which can be combined with GPLed software -- without any
restrictions beyond those allowed in the GPL.]
--
Raul
Reply to: