Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL

[Anthony DeRobertis <anthony@derobert.net>]

Walter Landry wrote:

>You're right.  I did not notice that.  That makes the analysis much
>simpler.  The developers, in their wisdom, essentially changed DFSG
>#10 to add the GFDL without invariant sections.
>
Unfortunately, DFSG 10 reads:
*
**Example Licenses*
The "*GPL <http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html>*", "*BSD
<http://www.debian.org/misc/bsd.license>*", and "*Artistic
<http://www.perl.com/pub/a/language/misc/Artistic.html>*" licenses are
examples of licenses that we consider "free"//.

and not

*Special Exceptions*
As a special exception, we consider he "GPL", "BSD", and "Artistic"
licenses "free".


So that leads us right back to my point of trying to figure out what the
Project is telling us about interpreting licenses and the DFSG.