Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo internal structure

[Christian Birchinger]

I think i also wrote something about the difference between
liceses which restrict using and those which restrict
distribution.

On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 09:18:35AM -0800, Bob Miller wrote:
> Christian Birchinger wrote:
>
> > It might sound a bit rude but i think the defaults should be
> > defined that most of the time only zealots need to tweak
> > them. I think most users don't care about most licenses and
> > shouldn't need to mess with this.
>
> I've seen several people express this attitude, and I like it a lot.
>
> Let me tell you about my retirement plan.  I'm going to write a game,
> Linux-only, make it good enough that a few hundred of you will emerge
> it and try it out.  Then I'll change the license agreement so that
> next time you emerge the game you'll owe me $1million US.  Since
> you all have ACCEPT_LICENSES="*" as the default, you'll all accept my
> new license, I'll take you all to court (after subpoenaing apache logs
> from all the mirrors so I know who you are, and subpoenaing your
> make.conf and make.globals to prove you accepted the license), and sue
> you for my license fee.  If I can recover 1% of what you'll all owe
> me, I'll be happy enough.
>
> Okay, that's NOT REALLY my plan.  I'm at least slightly ethical. (-:
> But it illustrates why you don't under any circumstances want
> ACCEPT_LICENSES="*", either as the default or as an option.  Accepting
> a license has consequences, and those consequences can hurt you.*  I'd
> recommend against letting the parser recognize a wildcard for licenses
> -- there's just too much danger for people who don't know any better
> to hurt themselves.
>
> That's my opinion.  It's worth what you paid for it.

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list