Re: draft-bradner-rfc-extracts-00.txt

[Don Armstrong <[e-mail]>]

[Kindly refrain from Cc:'ing me, as I am subscribed to the list.]

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 14:44, Don Armstrong wrote: 
> > The basic premise of the desert island test is that a license should
> > not force an individual on a desert island to be in violation of the
> > license merely because they cannot communicate with the world at
> > large. See [2] and the thread that follows for much more information.
> 
> We spend enough time worrying about actual problems that worrying
> about hypotheticals like this is a waste of time.

This is merely a specific test that explains why such a clause is
necessarily non-free, and won't be suitable for inclusion in Debian.

Whether or not members of the ipr wg decide to address these concerns
are not is an issue to be determined by the ipr wg. Either way, the
issues remain, and are very real. [I would not have spent my time
attempting to explain them to you all if I felt they were not.]


Don Armstrong

-- 
It has always been Debian's philosophy in the past to stick to what
makes sense, regardless of what crack the rest of the universe is
smoking.
 -- Andrew Suffield in [e-mail]

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg