discuss: Proposal for revised license and license requirements.
Subject:
Re: Proposal for revised license and license requirements.
From:
Mysid ####@####.####
Date:
17 Jun 2005 07:22:13 -0000
Message-Id: <6eb799ab05061700227952f3a3@mail.gmail.com>
> 1. LDP has no legal existence as a "person". This would require
> re-forming as a corporation or some other legal entity.
> 2. Even if it did, unlike the sort of "publisher" you envision,
> LDP doesn't gain copyright title under contract, and so would
> have no standing to enforce document licence terms.
To maintain control of what it serves it shouldn't need to be.
Presumably people other than those running the LDP aren't able to
just stick whatever tarballs they like on the LDP servers and have
them distributed as "LDP documents".
... ... the LDP ought to be perfectly technically capable of stopping
itself from putting out modified documents if it really doesn't want to.
Someone could put out a document on their own server and claim it's
an LDP document, but then they are just lying....[hmm, and they could
do that anyways]
--
-Mysid
