debian-legal needs a FAQ (was: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem)
On Sunday, Aug 17, 2003, at 22:06 US/Eastern, MJ Ray wrote:
...a reminder that it's impossible to do this. We have to assume that
the reader of the English-language version is actually capable of
English and understanding the words. For all we know, someone could be
interpreting "the" as a reference to a hot drink, so I hope that you
clarify it for them, because it's our job to make sure people
it no matter how dumb they're being, right?
Come now, this is a little silly. I don't think the Social Contract
should be lengthened by adding a bunch of definitions. However, I think
this would be an appropriate subject for a Debian-legal FAQ.
Debian-legal really could use a FAQ. Now, I know that saying "X would
be useful" is cheap. However, I hereby volunteer to help write and
maintain it. I think there are a variety of subjects to cover,
* Who we are
o What does debian-legal do?
o What types of questions should be posted here
o Who may ask questions here
o Pointer to the list archives
o Intruduction to some of the regulars here.
* Our interpretation of the Social Contract
o How we understand the various words and phrases in it
- What we understand "software" to mean
o Specific tests we apply to licenses to gauge compliance
- desert island
- chinese dissident
* Specific legal things (better category title needed...)
o Certain cases that come up often
- Feist v. Rural Telecom
- Lotus v. Borland
o References to copyright laws worldwide
- Title 17 USC
- Many others
* Discussion of various licenses
o Clearly OK ones
- BSD, GPL, etc.
o Borderline, but OK ones
o Not OK ones
- Quick signs of a non-free license (non-commercial use, etc.)
- Various commercial, no modification, etc. licenses.
- link to GFDL FAQ
I think this would be a good start if it was written and, as I said,
I'm willing to write part of it. Any suggestions for the outline?