[License-review] For approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 4)
nigel.2048 at gmail.com
Wed Dec 11 17:12:52 UTC 2019
The bar is being moved here. CAL does not require that the software be
able to import any data to get back to a running state...or (according to
Van) even need to export any data so a SQL dump is acceptable in meeting
the CAL requirement.
So the user's "ability to get back to the place they were" probably
requires that they re-enter the data and re-doing any associations by hand
anyway. The data doesn't even have to be in any kind of layout to
facilitate re-entering the data. Here you go...a SQL dump of your data,
enjoy. I could even just create a single PNG of all the data and meet CAL
If the objective really is for the user to be able to get back to where
they were with a clean copy of the system then CAL should specify that CAL
software should support import/export round tripping of user data.
In any case, the operation of the software is not dependent on the user's
customer data being present or your software is broken.
I take it you do not like the suggestion that the downstream software user
is under no obligation to provide any customer data that the original code
did not provide as export?
On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 12:37 AM Henrik Ingo <henrik.ingo at avoinelama.fi>
> On Wed, 11 Dec 2019, 03:29 VanL, <van.lindberg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> The use or operation of the software is not dependent on user’s customer
>>> provided data being present...
>> This is not really correct, if you think about it.
>> I don't think it is debatable to say that some (most?) software works
>> differently in the presence of particular data. The subroutines the run are
>> different; the displayed interface may be different; the state of the
>> software is *different.* Because the accumulated state is different, the
>> actual functioning of the software, as experienced by the user, is
>> I agree that the user has the ability to get back to the place where they
>> were by re-entering the data and re-doing any associations made. But the
>> latent potential for the software to work the same way is not the same as
>> the software actually functioning the exact same way.
> Taking this argument further, the user can also rewrite all the code from
> scratch, and therefore all copyleft licenses (and open source) are
> unnecessary in general.
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at lists.opensource.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the License-review