Subject: Re: Affero GPL 2(d)
From: Eben Moglen <moglen@columbia.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:42:29 -0400

Please forgive my delay.  
  
On Monday, 16 August 2004, Michael Bernstein wrote:

  To wit:
  
  1) Can the word 'immediate' be removed from section 2(d)? I am less 
  concerned over reuse of code than I am over the obvious applicability of 
  the license to a wider range of protocols and software.

Yes, one could do that.  I would use some word indicating an
expectation that response will not be unreasonably delayed.  I
recognize the issue of protocol delay, but I think it is important
there to establish that what was an interactive option in the code as
distributed must remain an interactive option in the code as modified
and deployed.
  
  2) Can the requirement for making the download available using the same 
  protocol as the one through which the user is interacting with the 
  program be removed in order to make using (or substituting) alternate 
  download protocols more explicitly permissible?
  
Yes.  One mode of infringement that should be guarded against is use
of a proprietary protocol to distribute source.  I have considered
alternate drafting and would welcome suggestions.

-- 
 Eben Moglen                       voice: 212-854-8382 
 Professor of Law                    fax: 212-854-7946       moglen@
 Columbia Law School, 435 West 116th Street, NYC 10027     columbia.edu
 General Counsel, Free Software Foundation   http://moglen.law.columbia.edu