>http://keionline.org/node/2363
Where is your god now?
The keyword here is "shall"
The party may or may not. It doesn't say he mustn't.
You're literally retarded.
>>51227032
>1. No Party shall require the transfer of, or access to, source code of software owned by a person of another Party, as a condition for the import, distribution, sale or use of such software, or of products containing such software, in its territory.
That's unequivocably forbidding copyleft.
In effect that means that governments can't require some types of license from contractors.
>>51227059
What does the "Party" stand for in this paragraph?
>>51227059
but with stuff like gpl the original writer still is the owner, so he sgould be able to require so
>>51227110
The owner is a party like any other.
>>51227097
It could mean a "stakeholder" in TPP, or it could mean "any party in general". These documents are always intentionally vague to permit cherry-picked enforcement.
>>51227032
It's still against one of the four fundamental freedoms.
Learn your stallman dude
>>51227123
Do you really think anyone would include "must provide source code" or anything similar? It may as well be rewritten as "Party shall require the transfer of, or access to, source code" but that doesn't at all mean it's mandatory or that the source code must be given.
>>51227032
Shall means to do.
>>51227172
Desperation of NSA, death of an empire.
>>51227172
Have you not read the GPL?
That's literally a requirement. You MUST make the source code available to all those who use the software.
Forces governments to only buy closed source programs and OSes
>>51227200
So abide by the GPL or don't. How does TIPP and those clauses make it impossible to abide by? As I said, "shall not" isn't "must not". There is a choice between the parties.
>>51227260
Shall: the verb in question is bound to take place.
Shall not: the verb in question is bound not to take place.
Piece of legislation telling you that you shall not: the verb in question is not allowed by law.
>>51227260
That's the thing tho, with this TPP clause people will be able to distribute GPL'd software without having to give the source code. It would end copyleft as we know it.
>>51227260
Do you not understand what 'shall not' means?
Think gandalf
>>51227260
you shall not => i will not let you
>>51227032
>no party shall
What the fuck are you talking about? Are you fucking retarded or something? That literally says they can't require it.
>>51226507
Ooh man, look at his butt and belly curves.
I just rubbed one to him.
>>51227385
but if you have code in the software they are distributing you can sue them
>>51227385
No, the software license would override the TPP. To avoid that, copyleft software can't be used.
>>51226507
fake and gay
>>51227032
>thou shalt not kill
>>51226507
http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/2015-November/022243.html
Basically I think this articles aren't about open source and free softwares.
I think it's to protect governments spyware. If a USA company sells a software to china this make sure USA doesn't have to provide the source code to china.
It's more another way to protect proprietary license and it will not harm the open source community.
What is annoying with that is the definition of critical infrastructure. They really needs to define that.
>>51227565
>Basically I think this articles aren't about open source and free softwares.
The conditions probably aren't. But that doesn't stop them from applying to free software.
>>51227260
>>51227032
>have to actually explain that "shall not" means "nigga you can't do that shit"
>>51227260
Shall not means must not. Look at the US' second amendment. If shall not meant what your faggot ass thought we would have our guns taken away.
>>51227607
I don't see how this apply to free software
>1. No Party shall require the transfer of, or access to, source code of software owned by a person of another Party, as a condition for the import, distribution, sale or use of such software, or of products containing such software, in its territory.
It doesn't say that providing the source code is forbidden, it just say that you can't ask for the source code of a software. Well, you can, but they can say no, and nothing will force them to provide it.
also 3.
> (b) a Party from requiring the modification of source code of software necessary for that software to comply with laws or regulations which are not inconsistent with this Agreement.
For me they seems to say
>you can do whatever you want with your program in your country, provide the source or not, but if you provide the program to another country, you'll have to give the source code so we can modify it to comply with our laws.
It's basically a law to review the source code from other countries like the Chinese gov.
Also it might be harmful for the citizens since your government isn't forced to provide the source code of software they create (so in the case of a software used during elections, they can put whatever they want in the source code, no one will look at it)
>>51227857
this.
>>51227857
>It doesn't say that providing the source code is forbidden, it just say that you can't ask for the source code of a software.
I don't think people ITT understand Free Software.
One of the basic tenants of Free Software is that the source *must* be made available upon request.
Lets say that I make a fork of GCC and add an --install-gentoo flag. If I release it to the public, the GPL requires that I make the source code as available as the binaries.
If the TPP passes as stated in OPs link, people distributing copies and forks of GPL licensed software won't be required to make the source code accessable (as they are now).
This means that Microsoft will be able to make a fork of say, Firefox, and release only binaries. Currently they would be required to provide the source for their modified versions.
Anyone could take free software and make it non-free, and the law would then allow that.
The provision kills the second and fourth essential freedoms of Free Software.
>>51228668
>this law converts ganootard licenses into BSD licenses
Maybe people will finally start using ganootard software now.
>>51228668
but the question is : can it really bypass the GPL ? I'm not sure of that. I think a judge will have to decide, and based on what he says we will be fixed.
>>51226507
If free software actually were to be banned, it would only become more popular. Just look at other underground projects like the pirate bay which is know as known as Netflix thanks to the media.
>>51229077
now*
So, are the people of the participating countries going to revolt or not?
>>51228668
>This means that Microsoft will be able to make a fork of say, Firefox, and release only binaries
...but only in another country that is in the TPP. It's talking about import and export, nothing changes in the US.
>>51229098
no. The opinion is controlled by the media. If media doesn't talk about it nothing will happen.
Even if medias talk about it, it will be like Edward Snowden case. Media will talk about it, people will don't give a shit.
>>51229098
they will if we don't inform the main public enough about it
we already have some congressmen showing their opposition to TPP thanks to #TPPWorserThanWeThought
gotta summarize that shit and spread the fire fast, shills are already trying to hose it down with some smooth talk
>the TPP text is 3 times longer than the Bible gais! XDD
>>51229143
>...import, distribution, sale or use of such software...
Consider the words directly following "import". They apply to all people in a TPP state, so distribution within a single TPP state is still under these laws.
>>51229669
>#TPPWorserThanWeThought
>Worser
no
>>51227097
>>51227118
"Party" refers to any of the signatory countries - it does not refer to an individual (see Article 1.3, with a list of definitions).
That clause has nothing to do with free software directly; its purpose is to prevent a country from requiring the source code of a program written by a person of another country, before it is allowed to be sold/used/etc. in the country, that's all.
Man, you guys really got your knickers in a knot, don't ya?
>>51226507
So countries won't be able to audit source code of software they buy? What the fuck?
How the fuck are people getting the misconception that free software would be banned as a result of this?
Free software: You give the source code of your software out, and people aren't allowed to distribute modifications of such without also providing source.
What this bans: You cannot demand someone give you source as a condition of you buying the software. This has nothing to do with F/OSS because the software creator is already giving out the source.
>>51231071
If it's mass-market commercial software, no, at least not blatantly. They could always just say "well, we're a little worried about your software, if we went with open source instead we could audit the source code nudge nudge wink wink".
It also doesn't cover things like software for critical infrastructure.
>>51231071
It says
>transfer [...] of source code [...], as a condition for the import, distribution, sale or use
I'm pretty sure an individual buyer (including a government) of software can still make availability of source code a condition for the deal.
>>51231518
You are misunderstanding free software. If you use GPL code in your software, source code of the WHOLE SOFTWARE must be made available.
I don't even know why eveyone is freaking out over TPP. There's so many world-ending technology bills being pumped out these days that I just can't keep up with them.
>>51231739
Yes, if you were to directly copy code from GPL software, you would have to release source code. Because you agreed to do that when you used the GPL'd source.
Now what does TPP have to do with that?
What does RMS have against Trump?
>>51232725
RMS supports Sanders and the green party.
>>51227260
You are a fucking retard, dude
>>51232763
Is it a reason enough to try to sabotage the campaigns of other candidates, though?
what are they gonna do, do you think?
ban the git, which hosts a gigantic amount of open source software that runs around ALL the shit in the world? ban linux which is the biggest os serverside? That would mean the end of the internet yall
>>51232781
Judging from the petition page, they are arguing that they don't want Trump to use SNL to influence people politically.
>>51227643
You should though.
>>51233117
Why are europoors so obsessed with guns? It's such a red herring; crime has been on a long decline for decades. It's irrelevant.
BSD wins again.
KEEP CRYING STALLMANITES, YOUR LICENSE A SHIT.
>>51233153
>implying europoor
While I'm not in favor of TPP it really doesn't ban free software. It bans governments forcing proprietary software makers from giving them their source code.
>>51227059
It's actually backward: it means that one cannot block distribution of the software on the basis that the developer hasn't delivered source code to the country.
>>51227565
That seems correct, but china still gets to prevent usaware from being distributed inland (just not under the conditions described).
