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

Bug#183860: RMS's comment on this bug is mostly irrelevant. :-/

On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 04:05:26PM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> On Dec 31, 2003, at 03:39, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >>Yes. But the output of TeX contains no creative elements from
> >>texinfo.tex and therefore is not a derivate of texinfo.tex.
> >
> >What's a "creative element"?  I see no language in the GNU GPL
> >limiting the scope of its restrictions to such a thing.
> I assume a "creative element" is what makes for an original work of 
> authorship (as opposed to a mere listing of facts, like in Feist).

While the matter appears to have been settled thanks to an upstream
license clarification by the Texinfo maintainers, I can only see your
point as materially affecting the argument if texinfo.tex is regarded as
containing no creative elements.  Such a statement would probably not go
unchallenged by the FSF.

G. Branden Robinson                |     One doesn't have a sense of humor.
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     It has you.
branden@debian.org                 |     -- Larry Gelbart
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: