婆罗门
精华
|
战斗力 鹅
|
回帖 0
注册时间 2019-11-28
|
本帖最后由 Nanachi 于 2024-10-24 09:02 编辑
编者按：由于“相关法规”可能涉及出口管控条例，FSF 在 GPL FAQ 中提到，虽然 FSF 原则上反对出口管控的实施，要求使用者提供证明其不属于被制裁对象这类“明哲保身”的行为不违反 GPL，FSF 则会确保从 FSF 取得其发布的 GPL 软件不需要这方面的证明。可能这次不会干涉 Linux 开发团队的决定。
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#ExportWarranties
Some distributors of GPLed software require me in their umbrella EULAs or as part of their downloading process to “represent and warrant” that I am located in the US or that I intend to distribute the software in compliance with relevant export control laws. Why are they doing this and is it a violation of those distributors' obligations under GPL? (#ExportWarranties)
一些 GPL 软件的分销商在其综合最终用户许可协议（EULA）中或作为下载过程的一部分，要求我“代表并保证”我位于美国，或我打算按照相关出口管制法律分发软件。他们为何这样做，这是否违反了这些分销商在 GPL 下的义务？（#出口保证）
This is not a violation of the GPL. Those distributors (almost all of whom are commercial businesses selling free software distributions and related services) are trying to reduce their own legal risks, not to control your behavior. Export control law in the United States might make them liable if they knowingly export software into certain countries, or if they give software to parties they know will make such exports. By asking for these statements from their customers and others to whom they distribute software, they protect themselves in the event they are later asked by regulatory authorities what they knew about where software they distributed was going to wind up. They are not restricting what you can do with the software, only preventing themselves from being blamed with respect to anything you do. Because they are not placing additional restrictions on the software, they do not violate section 10 of GPLv3 or section 6 of GPLv2.
这并不违反 GPL。那些分销商（几乎所有都是销售自由软件分发及相关服务的商业企业）试图降低自身的法律风险，而非控制你的行为。美国的出口管制法律可能使他们在明知向某些国家出口软件，或向明知会进行此类出口的第三方提供软件时承担责任。通过要求其客户及其他软件分发对象提供这些声明，他们保护自己在日后监管机构询问他们所分发的软件最终去向时，能够证明自己已尽到注意义务。他们并未限制你对软件的使用，只是防止因你的行为而受到牵连。由于他们并未对软件施加额外限制，因此不违反 GPLv3 第 10 条或 GPLv2 第 6 条的规定。
The FSF opposes the application of US export control laws to free software. Not only are such laws incompatible with the general objective of software freedom, they achieve no reasonable governmental purpose, because free software is currently and should always be available from parties in almost every country, including countries that have no export control laws and which do not participate in US-led trade embargoes. Therefore, no country's government is actually deprived of free software by US export control laws, while no country's citizens should be deprived of free software, regardless of their governments' policies, as far as we are concerned. Copies of all GPL-licensed software published by the FSF can be obtained from us without making any representation about where you live or what you intend to do. At the same time, the FSF understands the desire of commercial distributors located in the US to comply with US laws. They have a right to choose to whom they distribute particular copies of free software; exercise of that right does not violate the GPL unless they add contractual restrictions beyond those permitted by the GPL.
FSF 反对将美国出口管制法律应用于自由软件。这些法律不仅与软件自由的总体目标相悖，而且无法实现任何合理的政府目的，因为自由软件目前且应始终可以从几乎所有国家的各方获取，包括那些没有出口管制法律且不参与美国主导的贸易禁运的国家。因此，没有任何国家的政府因美国出口管制法律而实际失去获取自由软件的机会，同时，在我们看来，没有任何国家的公民应因其政府政策而被剥夺自由软件。所有由 FSF 发布的 GPL 许可软件副本，均可从我们这里获取，无需告知您的居住地或使用意图。同时，FSF 理解位于美国的商业分销商遵守美国法律的愿望。他们有权选择向谁分发特定副本的自由软件；行使这一权利并不违反 GPL，除非他们在 GPL 允许的范围之外添加合同限制。 |
|
楼主: hanyuwei70
沪公网安备 31010702007642号 )
发表于 2024-10-24 09:01
linux在linux desktop元年真的要来了的今年自爆了多少有点黑色幽默
发表于 2024-10-24 11:09