For Approval: GPLv3

[Chris Travers]

Just to be clear---

my concern is that we have to decide where exactly to draw the line wrt 
discrimination against fields of endeavor.  Either we take the line that 
"if the license does not explicitly name any such fields, then it is not 
discriminatory" or we take the line that "discrimination may be 
explicitly state or implied, or simply collateral damage of the license."

If we take the former case here and approve the GPL v3 without 
specifying exactly what this means *now* then we will have a harder time 
when someone wants to take it further and we will be stuck with a "don't 
ask, don't tell" policy on this portion of the OSD.

In short if the GPL v3 is approved, I think it is *absolutely mandatory* 
that this section be clarified not only in rationale but as to where the 
line is actually drawn, and whether exceptions are going to be made 
allowing discrimination of certain fields of endeavor such as DRM.

If we are going to do this, let us at least *try* to contain the erosion 
:-).

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: chris.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 171 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20070815/892c76f6/attachment.vcf>