Re: Please see the GNU FDL discussion on debian-legal
Em Tue, 9 Apr 2002 14:26:39 +0300, Richard Braakman <firstname.lastname@example.org> escreveu:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:02:47PM -0400, Thomas Hood wrote:
> > While I don't regard the DFSG as already applying to
> > documentation, the spirit of it is naturally extended to cover
> > documentation. I would suggest that the GFDL is a reasonable
> > license to use for free documentation --- free as in 'free
> > to use and modify', but also free as in 'free speech'.
> If the GFDL were a "free to use and modify" license, then we would not
> be having this discussion. The problem is that the GFDL specifies
> parts that we are _not_ free to modify, or even to delete.
indeed, I would not like to see people modifying my points of view and
redistributing saying that's what I think, you see
> > Several people said that they didn't want Debian
> > documentation to be full of political rants. They would
> > like to reserve the right to delete the parts they don't
> > like from the manuals they package. But what is this but
> > censorship? And how is censorship compatible with liberty?
> What you're advocating is the evil twin of censorship, namely forced speech.
I can't see why... are you forced to package anything?
email@example.com: Gustavo Noronha <http://people.debian.org/~kov>
Debian: <http://www.debian.org> * <http://debian-br.cipsga.org.br>
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com