Re: A possible GFDL compromise

[tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> Another form of tangent is citing practical inconveniences, often
> shared with many other accepted free licenses, as if they were
> reasons to consider a license non-free.

This is incorrect.  Practical inconveniences are precisely the point
in deciding whether a restriction is insignificant or not.

If free means "free of all restriction", then none of us have insisted
on that.  We have generally meant "free of noxious restrictions", and
for that it's important to address whether a restriction is noxious.

If free means "free of restrictions X, Y, Z", then I insist that the
list of X, Y, and Z must be the same for all different kinds of
information, for precisely the reason that different kinds of
information shift and mutate into each other.