Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal

[Mathieu Roy <yeupou@gnu.org>]

Keith Dunwoody <kstephen@interchange.ubc.ca> a tapoté :

> Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > It seems weird to me. Someone said that GFLed documentation without
> > invariant sections can be made non-free if someone getting a copy of
> > the documentation add invariant sections.
> > What does it change? Do we consider BSD software as non-free software
> > because they do not forbid a software to become (wholy) "invariant"?
> >
> 
> Please review the archive.  GFDL is non-free even without invariant
> sections, due to the anti-DMCA clause.

This has been discussed recently and it was so not clear. 

-- 
Mathieu Roy
 
  Homepage:
    http://yeupou.coleumes.org
  Not a native english speaker: 
    http://stock.coleumes.org/doc.php?i=/misc-files/flawed-english