Regarding the text:no permission is given to distribute covered works that illegally invade users' privacy In section: gpl3.drm.p0.s3 Submitted by: swehneron 2006-01-16 at 17:15 EST
6 agree: proski, neroden, pitrou, tsmithe, catzi, fej
noted by swehneron 2006-01-16 at 17:15 EST:
Why would a license declare that no permission is given to commit illegal acts?
No it declares that DISTRIBUTION of works that commit illegal acts is
disallowed. As such it is this part of the license-text that makes
distribution of such works illegal as well.
Comment 234: No permission for illegal acts?
This Comment is part of the discussion on:#1130: (fontana) Perceptions of "redundancy" or pointlessness of a denial of permission for illegal conduct
Regarding the text:
In section: gpl3.drm.p0.s3
Submitted by: swehner on 2006-01-16 at 17:15 EST
6 agree: proski, neroden, pitrou, tsmithe, catzi, fej
noted by swehner on 2006-01-16 at 17:15 EST: noted by mortis on 2006-03-01 at 15:27 EST: noted by massa on 2006-05-17 at 14:14 EDT:
collapse children