[License-review] For approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 2)

[Henrik Ingo]

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 6:13 PM Lawrence Rosen <lrosen at rosenlaw.com> wrote:

> Pam Chestek wrote:
>
> > More importantly, why do you think a court would necessarily exclude it
> as a possible interpretation? For starters, I am only stating the view of
> the U.S. Copyright Office: "As a general rule, a computer program and the
> screen displays generated by that program are considered the same work,
> because the program code contains fixed expression that produces the screen
> displays." Copyright Compendium § 721.10(A).
>
> Pam, now I am confused by you and by the Copyright Office. Forget CAL and
> forget AGPL. If a normal GPL program on *your* computer causes *my*
> computer to display a red square, have you distributed *your* GPL program
> to *my* computer? That sounds like a real reach for copyleft, even for a
> sophisticated API that makes computers do things. I now worry about that
> so-called "general rule" for GPL email programs!
>
>
Why should it matter whether there are 1 or 2 computers involved? What if I
have 1 computer but two screens? What if my screen is a video projector and
I beam the user interface into your office through the window? What if, in
your example your computer displays a red square because you opened an X
session to Pam's computer?

Typically it's not difficult to know what is the user interface of a
program, including a web app. It's also not difficult to know that data
such as email content is not that.

henrik
-- 
henrik.ingo at avoinelama.fi
+358-40-5697354        skype: henrik.ingo            irc: hingo
www.openlife.cc

My LinkedIn profile: http://fi.linkedin.com/pub/henrik-ingo/3/232/8a7
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190826/7e9ee983/attachment.html>