English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
Impact of French DADVSI law on Free Software and OCaml (was: Re: [Caml-list] Slashdot)
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2005-12-07 (09:41)
From: Oliver Bandel <oliver@f...>
Subject: Re: Impact of French DADVSI law on Free Software and OCaml (was: Re: [Caml-list] Slashdot)
On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 08:54:45AM +0100, David MENTRE wrote:
> In English, it means that *any* software, *any* database and *any*
> sound, image, etc. should be legally registred to the French State
> (/dépôt légal/) as soon as it is made available to the public. I'm not
> a lawyer so I might have missed something but, if this is true, (1) it
> is utterly stupid and (2) it could impact the development of Free
> Software in France. Should Xavier Leroy et al. registred OCaml each
> time a new release is made? Should we declare all the images on the
> OCaml web site? Should the OCaml bug database be registred?

If it is, how you write,
then that's a good day for bureaucracy.

Better would be, to register each such registering-operation too. ;-)

That's recursive and self-referential and infinitve,
and so the load will be much higher than to be expected
by the lawyers.

So: it will not be possible to use laws in genreal, even if they are
meant general. But it can be used for certain things (here: THIS or THAT
software (or anything else), at will.

So... is it good to do that? well...

Looks like self-disabling of the lawyers by trying to achieve anything. ;-)

This will not work in general, but can be hinderance to certain projects,
if people insist on this bureaucracy. :(