🚀 go-pugleaf

On 24 Aug 90 02:25:20 GMT, lambert@cwi.nl (Lambert Meertens) said:

lambert> In article <PCG.90Aug23170512@athene.cs.aber.ac.uk>
lambert> pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:
> On 14 Aug 90 10:12:35 GMT, jim@cs.strath.ac.uk (Jim Reid) said:
>> In article <PCG.90Aug13144340@athene.cs.aber.ac.uk>) pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:

lambert> May I respectfully submit the suggestion that you talk this out
lambert> over a pint of beer or some other less public medium?

Well, I do not know why Jim Reid insists so much in personal attacks;
maybe just because he has greater respect for News traditions than me :-).

The public medium is very appropriate for the merit of this discussion;
the issue of closed networks or groups, {UK,EU}U{UG,NET} [or ClariNet
(TM), but I do not know whether it carries or restricts redistribution
of the gnu.all newgroups and mailing lists and the GPL sources posted in
the sources newgroups], which forbid redistribution to non members and
its relationship to the aims of the FSF (less information hoarding) is I
think an issue to be discussed publicly, and I have I reckon stuck to
it.

Another interesting related issue to discuss publicly and not over a
beer is that of compilation copyrights of collections of GPL documents
and software; Jim Reid has hinted that the various {UK,EU}{UUG,NET}
organizations have compilation copyrights on their tape distributions
etc...; these may well cover GPL materials.

    I hope it is appreciated that I have carefully refrained from
    slighting Jim Reid or the UKUUG and the EUUG that he seems so keen
    about (is he officially speaking for the UKUUG or UKNET by any
    chance?). I have the greatest respect for UKUUG and UKNET, whose
    staff are often volunteer, or little paid, and have anyhow produced
    a lot of useful work (the conferences are always a success, the
    UKUUG repository at Imperial is very well organized, the UKNET and
    EUNET gateways work quite well, just to mention a few things).

    I like less the slant towards favouring institutional members at
    the expense of individual and student members, but that is a
    consequence of how the membership is composed I guess (not of who
    pays the bills maybe, because I reckon that individual and student
    members pay proportionately much more than institutional members).

The solution to this discussion is not talking over a beer; it would be

1) the FSF defending their copyright and talking straight to EUUG/UKUUG
and EUNET/UKNET about removing any fetters from the redistribution of at
least the GPL material or else not distributing it

or

2) the {UK,E}U{UG,NET} getting wiser and changing the wording
of their membership contract to something like

    *	Special arrangements with other organizations or vendors made in
	the interest of members are personal and non transferable (just
	like a UNIX source license :->).

    *	No more than one copy (or a number of copies equal to the ratio
	between the institutional membership fee and the individual
	one) of each item available from or thru the group may be
	obtained at the price reserved for members.

which is *very* different from the existing clause, and is not a blanket
prohibition (as Jim Reid put it:

jim> The stuff that the UKUUG is trying to protect are things like
jim> newsletters, tape distributions and conference proceedings,

so clearly) on giving away (originals or copies) of documentation or
software obtained thanks to the UKUUG, with no exception made not even
for GPL materials.  Such a change would also make these organizations
look a bit less corporatist, at least in my eyes.

I think that I will now try to make the second alternative happen by
writing to the {UK,E}U{UG,NET} saying that I cannot sign their
membership contract as it is because it would mean consenting to
limitations of my right to give away copies of GPL material obtained
thru them, which I would not accept, and asking them to change the
contract. {UK,E}U{UG,NET} members that care about information hoarding
in general, and that of GPL material in particular could also take up
the matter.

What should not be public is the kind of personal attack that somebody
else indulges in, quite foolishly.

	I might also mention to the UKUUG that, if he is a member or an
	official sposkeman for them, a certain Jim Reid may be
	bringing them into disrepute, and his membership contract may
	have to be terminated :-) :-) :-). Not that I like the relevant
	applicable corporatist clause, which is customarily used by
	the management of a society to muzzle public criticism from the
	membership, but somebody could have a taste of that kind of
	medicine. :-) :-) :-)
--
Piercarlo "Peter" Grandi           | ARPA: pcg%uk.ac.aber.cs@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Dept of CS, UCW Aberystwyth        | UUCP: ...!mcsun!ukc!aber-cs!pcg
Penglais, Aberystwyth SY23 3BZ, UK | INET: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk