Re: [rms@gnu.org: Free Software Needs Free Documentation]
Hi,
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:
Marcus> On Sun, Aug 09, 1998 at 05:28:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>
>> I personally would not like to allow a standard I create to be
>> readily modifiable, for what that matters. If you got ideas, feed 'em
>> to me -- and I see about getting them into the standard.
Marcus> Mmmh. I consider the Debian Policy documents to set
Marcus> standards, too. They are free, nevertheless there is no fear
Marcus> about them.
If they are, we are the authors. We can choose whatever
licence we choose -- and we have put it under the GPL. )Hmm. Mayeb we
should rethink that after we finish this discussion.
Marcus> I can understand that people have that fear, but I think it
Marcus> is not substantiated (at least within the free osftware
Marcus> community), and therefore should not be taken into account in
Marcus> this discussion.
Not so. Our fears of trojan horses have never been
instantiated. Our fears about people destroyin our CVS data have
never been instantiated. Does that mean we do not plan and take
precautions? This is a groundless argument.
Marcus> Some people are frightened about their software, too, and
Marcus> forbid disassembling etc. We don't allow this software in
Marcus> main.
We have a reason. It has to do with sharing. It has to do with
being able to see what is going on, and not being locked in to a
vendor. Part of that does not apply to documents, and the sharing
aspect is actually enhanced if we can trust we all follow the same
standard, not w locally modified version of what used to be a common
but is not more standard.
>> No, I'm not. What I am saying is that I can see authors not
>> wanting their baby to be modified and distorted, and releasing
>> standards under no-modification-or-translation terms, and I do not
>> see this as a threat to the community, indeed, it is not even
>> detrimental.
Marcus> It is okay for authors to think and act this way, but I don't
Marcus> think we can distribute technical documents with this
Marcus> restrict copyright in main.
Reasons, please.
Marcus> Example: Some people would not like to have bash scripts
Marcus> ported to csh, because they consider csh scripts as
Marcus> insecure. We don't allow authors to put restrictions like
Marcus> that.
This is not the same case at all (please try not to mix
software examples into this, they just confuse the issue).
Marcus> Just think of an author who thinks his work should not be
Marcus> translated into <put any language here>, because he is a
Marcus> rassist, or dislikes the language personally for whatever
Marcus> reasons (maybe to annoy his neighbour). I don't think that is
Marcus> acceptable.
This is borderline. However, the resistance to translation
could be that some things do not translate well (peotry is one). For
some works of art, translation is artistic butchery. I can see why
people may not want that to happen.
>> As long as one may create a standard that borroes from the
>> inital standard, but is distinct, and has a distinct name, I think it
>> is OK to allow the document into main.
Marcus> This comes closer to our needs. But now you are fleeing in
Marcus> generalizations. What do you mean with "borrow"? We can't
Marcus> make policy with such vague terms, so we should keep on the
Marcus> safe side with terms we have experiences with.
Like your example licence borrowed heavily from the GPL. The
GPL is not modifiable; but your license is likely to be allowed as
long as it does not pretend to be the GPL.
How about an original Graphic Novel? How about James Joyces
"Ullyses"? Do you approve af people punctuating Joyce's books?
>> I am not really talking about ideal licencing here (marcus and
>> RMS and co are doing that). I am talking about wht I think is
>> detrimental to the community, and shold not be in main, and what I
>> think does not harm the community, and, IMHO, should be allowed into
>> Debian.
Marcus> I'm also not discussing perfect world here. Reality requires
Marcus> clear terms. We have to decide if we want to allow
Marcus> non-dfsg-free data entities at all, and when, which under
Marcus> which additional restrictions.
The discussion is a good start. But we have a long way to go
before we can come up with something.
manoj
--
Five names that I can hardly stand to hear, Including yours and mine
and one more chimp who isn't here, I can see the ladies talking how
the times is gettin' hard, And that fearsome excavation on Magnolia
boulevard, Yes, I'm goin' insane, And I'm laughing at the frozen
rain, Well, I'm so alone, honey when they gonna send me home? Bad
sneakers and a pina colada my friend, Stopping on the avenue by Radio
City, with a Transistor and a large sum of money to spend... You
fellah, you tearin' up the street, You wear that white tuxedo, how
you gonna beat the heat, Do you take me for a fool, do you think that
I don't see, That ditch out in the Valley that they're diggin' just
for me, Yes, and goin' insane, You know I'm laughin' at the frozen
rain, Feel like I'm so alone, honey when they gonna send me home?
(chorus) Bad Sneakers, "Steely Dan"
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
Reply to: