Anthony Towns <[email protected]> writes: > Well, "dissidents" supposedly want to be able to keep their changes > private to a small group from among all the people who have any knowledge > of their software. "ASP" folks want to keep their software private to > themselves.
Yes, dissidents want to share their changes with cooperating dissidents, but no one else because doing so would increase the risk beyond acceptable levels. The idea is that, before I make the software available in any way, I should be able to decide who should get access and who should not. And that list need not include the author. > One possiblity would be to change the distribute-to-author requirement > to be something like "If the author is aware of your modifications, and > requests them, you are required to provide them at cost", and require the > author to somehow positively demonstrate his awareness. If you're only > using the software locally, or amongst a few friends, the author can't > demonstrate any such awareness; if you provide a subscription service > to the public, one of your subscribers can mail the author and tell him > about it though. But the author may find out. -- Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03
