Showing comment 1132 [rss] [see on license] search you could login

GPLv3

# DISABLES ADDITIONAL ACTIONS FOR DRAFTERS

Issue 1132: Concerns regarding differing definitions in different countries

This Issue is part of the discussion on:
#1136: (fontana) Umbrella issue for objections to this provision

Regarding the text: illegally
In section: gpl3.drm.p0.s3
Submitted by: fontana (SFLC Attorney) on 2006-04-30 at 16:30 EDT
0 agree:
noted by fontana (SFLC Attorney) on 2006-04-30 at 16:30 EDT:

Some comments argue that this provision increases the complexity of the license by incorporating varying local definitions of illegal privacy invasion. Some suggest that there is danger in delegating the definition to local legislation or regulation; some such local definitions may prohibit conduct generally considered legitimate in the free software community.
Member ticket #1125 added by fontana (SFLC Attorney) on 2006-04-30 at 16:33 EDT
Member ticket #773 added by fontana (SFLC Attorney) on 2006-04-30 at 16:33 EDT
Member ticket #673 added by fontana (SFLC Attorney) on 2006-04-30 at 16:33 EDT
Member ticket #235 added by fontana (SFLC Attorney) on 2006-04-30 at 16:33 EDT
noted by fontana (SFLC Attorney) on 2006-04-30 at 16:38 EDT:

The current language does not make clear whether the denial of permission to distribute is restricted to the country where the conduct is illegal, or whether it extends to all countries. (See Comment 193/7.)
Member ticket #193 added by fontana (SFLC Attorney) on 2006-04-30 at 16:38 EDT

collapse children

Child comment of 1132: 1125: internationally dangerous ±

Comment 1125: internationally dangerous


Regarding the text: illegally invade users' privacy
In section: gpl3.drm.p0.s3
Submitted by: pitrou on 2006-04-29 at 15:26 EDT
0 agree:
noted by pitrou on 2006-04-29 at 15:26 EDT:

By making a reference to local law about privacy, you are making the application of the GPLv3 internationally uncertain. Indeed, making a reference to privacy law makes the GPLv3 step outside of the frame of the Berne Convention on author rights.

Therefore the "illegally invade users'privacy" wording should be avoided.

I think a clear definition of DRM is: - a mode of distribution - that grants some of the rights present in the license while deliberately forbidding others

This is more or less what the second part of your sentence says.


collapse children


Child comment of 1132: 235: Invasion of privacy clause allows outsiders to mess with distribution rights ±

Comment 235: Invasion of privacy clause allows outsiders to mess with distribution rights


Regarding the text: no permission is given to distribute covered works that illegally invade users' privacy
In section: gpl3.drm.p0.s3
Submitted by: kop on 2006-01-16 at 17:18 EST
6 agree: proski, Jastiv, neroden, catzi, andrewpm, fej
noted by kop on 2006-01-16 at 17:18 EST:

What if, for instance, some silly legislative body decides that, for instance, revealing an IP number is an invasion of privacy. This clause seems to offer way too much scope for 3rd parties to interfere with distribution rights.

collapse children