Samuel Penn wrote: > On Monday 11 April 2005 14:42, Ricardo Gladwell wrote: >>It depends on how you define "service" - does it mean a service for >>public consumption, a web service? Working on the assumption that we are >>defining a service as a web service (which is what has been talked about >>previously by the FSF) I would argue that running a game for a few >>friends at a convention isn't providing a service. > > It would be very short sighted of them to limit themselves > to a specific technology. I believe there has already been some discussion on this topic within FSF and licensing circles before (it isn't new). There is even a version of the GPL that already has a similar clause[1], the Affero GPL[2]. It contains the new clause: "If the Program as you received it is intended to interact with users through a computer network and if, in the version you received, any user interacting with the Program was given the opportunity to request transmission to that user of the Program's complete source code, you must not remove that facility from your modified version of the Program or work based on the Program, and must offer an equivalent opportunity for all users interacting with your Program through a computer network to request immediate transmission by HTTP of the complete source code of your modified version or other derivative work."[2] I imagine this is what they would base the new version of the GPL on (hopefully eliminating some of the specifics, such as requiring transmission over HTTP). This is quite a narrow definition which is, IMHO, a good thing because it means that in cases such as you bring up you won't be forced to redistribute your changes if you use them privately. Kind regards... -- Ricardo Gladwell President, Free Roleplaying Community http://www.freeroleplay.org/ president@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [1] http://www.devchannel.org/webserviceschannel/02/05/21/2245226.shtml?tid=1 [2] http://www.affero.org/oagpl.html