[License-discuss] Private modification

Brendan Hickey brendan.m.hickey at gmail.com
Fri Aug 9 00:19:30 UTC 2019

Branching off from the Libre Source discussion. Not necessarily in reply to
Russell, but this seems like a good jumping off point.

On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 8:09 PM Russell McOrmond <russellmcormond at gmail.com>

> I will register my standard objection, which is that 2.2 seems to attempt
> to restrict private modification.  Many countries are starting to recognise
> the harm of claiming restrictions on private copying under copyright, so
> this reads as an attempt to circumvent in contract law a limitation or
> exception of copyright law.
> I believe any such attempts to circumvent limits and exceptions to
> copyright violate the intent of FLOSS even when not clearly understood to
> violate the language of the OSD.

What are some good policy arguments in favor of restrictions on private
modification? My own impression is that these licenses are so onerous as to
discourage any serious use. Are there any significant projects using the
RPL or similar licenses?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190808/2b657b54/attachment.html>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list