Re: Results for Debian's Position on the GFDL
Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
> Debian has labelled a license with serious, onerous practical problems free.
Labelling licences 'free' means little, as the FSF demonstrated
with the ironic name of the FDL. What matters is whether the software
under that licence is free software.
The practical problems beyond the DFSG have always been something
we commented in, but not a direct freedom problem themselves. The
FSF used to do this too - see their criticism of obnoxious
advertising clauses - instead of using advertising clauses like now.
> The obvious consequence is that any license with similar practical problems
> will also be considered free, and--going one small step further--licenses
> with serious problems in general will be considered free.
>
> This GR has tainted the "DFSG-free" label, probably permanently. [...]
I think that's a pessmistic, melodramatic interpretation and I hope
you're wrong. More pragmatically, "DFSG-free" was a stupid label for
licences which helped add to the confusion over whether it was the
licence or the liberty of the software and users that mattered to us.
If this GR kills it and lets us return to talking about whether
software is free software or not, then it's done one good thing.
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Reply to: