Re: distributable but non-free documents
On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 12:20:50AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> 1) It's a license text, and we don't reject a package for being non-DFSG
> free as long as *only* its license text is non-DFSG-free. The license
> text is only required due to copyright laws that presume that the
> exercise of the freedoms in the DFSG is not legitimate by default. If
> the copyright laws were such that we could take the freedoms in the DFSG
> for granted, the license would not be needed. You can also think of
> licenses as "metadata" that doesn't form part of the work itself.
1b) Debian makes a moral stand on free software. Not free licenses,
or free books, or free tea, or free beer, or free-for-all wrestling,
with all their various meanings of free.
There are interesting moral viewpoints on some of the above, but they
are not Debian's raison d'etre, and the project should not be overly
concerned with them.