Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

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: -- (:)
From: Alessandro Baretta <a.baretta@b...>
Subject: Re: Impact of French DADVSI law on Free Software and OCaml (was: Re: [Caml-list] Slashdot)
David MENTRE wrote:
> Article 21
> Le deuxième alinéa de l'article 1er de la loi n° 92-546 du 20 juin
> 1992 relative au dépôt légal est remplacé par les deux alinéas
> suivants :
> « Les logiciels et les bases de données sont soumis à l'obligation de
> dépôt légal dès lors qu'ils sont mis à disposition d'un public par la
> diffusion d'un support matériel quelle que soit la nature de ce
> support.
> « Sont également soumis au dépôt légal les signes, signaux, écrits,
> images, sons ou messages de toute nature faisant l'objet d'une
> communication publique en ligne. »
> """
> 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?

I am, too, by the stupidity of lawmakers. According to current valid Italian 
law, dating sometime in the '30s, all published material--websites and dynamic 
content of course--must be archived by two national libraries, for posterities 
sake. Google is nothing compared to what this law requires.