[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GFDL'ed documents with Front Cover text



On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 02:09:02PM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:

> Frank said:

> > assume a document licensed under GFDL, with no invariant sections (and
> > ...) has a front cover text (like "A GNU Manual") and a back cover text
>   [...]
> > What should the developers do in order to make it DFSG-free [...]

> This implies that a document with no invariant sections, but with
> one-sentence front- and back-cover sections does not meet the DFSG?
> Is that Debian's position?

> For example, GMP has Front-Cover Text

>     A GNU Manual

> and Back-Cover Text

>     You have freedom to copy and modify this GNU Manual, like GNU software

> and no invariant sections.  Must I really throw this document
> out of Debian (BTS 335403)?

Hmm. :/

Short as these are, they are still problematic from a free documentation
standpoint.  What if I borrow heavily from the GMP manual, but include this
material in a work that's I've written primarily myself?  Is it really fair
to require that I label my work "A GNU Manual"?  Since the GFDL limits the
front-cover text to five words or less and you only get one front-cover text
per work under this license, I can't even supplement it with a more accurate
cover text of my own.

The back-cover text is even worse, because it requires me to make a
statement which I consider misleading -- I do *not* consider the freedoms
the GFDL gives me to copy and modify manuals to be (sufficiently) similar to
those granted by GNU software.  (Parodoxically enough, if this statement
were *not* a GFDL Back-Cover Text, I would be more inclined to agree with it
and thus, be willing to distribute a document including the claim in
question; but as it stands, I consider it a bug that I'm forbidden to
fix...)

So yes, the current manual seems to fail the DFSG as confirmed by the latest
GR, and can't be distributed in main for etch without a license change.  I
would hope that this doesn't mean "throwing it out" of Debian, though; if we
fail to secure even such a modest licensing change as to make such cover
texts removable, then I would encourage you to consider at least shipping
the documentation in non-free.

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: