On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 19:38:09 -0600 Wesley J. Landaker wrote: > On Saturday 02 June 2007 19:05:16 Ben Finney wrote: [...] > > I agree that the GPL is the best FSF license to be applied to any > > work of authorship, but the FSF don't agree -- and I believe they > > expressed this disagreement long before they started promoting other > > licenses designed for non-program works. > > Well, maybe that is changing ... the latest draft says in the > Preample: > > "The GNU General Public License is a free, copyleft license for > software and other kinds of works." Section 0. of the GNU GPL *v2* states, in part: | 0. This License applies to any program or other work [...] | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | The "Program", below, refers to any such program or work [...] | ^^^^^^^ I think even the GNU GPL *v2* was designed with the applicability to non-program works in mind. It was certainly designed *primarily* for programs, but also in such a way to be applicable to any work of authorship. At least, that's my understanding after reading the license text so many times... -- http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through? ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgp9JHolN4O4S.pgp
Description: PGP signature