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

Re: First Call for votes: General resolution for the handling of the non-free section

   From: Matthew Palmer <mpalmer@debian.org>

   On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 09:19:40AM +0200, Mikko Moilanen wrote: >
   > Is it too much if somebody says "Please let others know that I
   > did wrote this manual?

   Certainly not, this is what we have copyright notices for.


   > Also, please don't let them change my personal opinions about X,
   > Y and Z."? Yes, it is too much and that's why we need GNU FDL.

   It's far too much.  If you want people to read your political
   statements, publish them.  Don't force them on unwilling
   recipients.  The right to free speech is not the right to force
   your views on an unwilling listener.

"People" dont have to read them. They can just skip them. Certainly
nobody shall be forced to read my statements. But I think that I have
the right for example say that "help the poor children in Uganda" in
my document acknowledgements or dedication page. I should also be
allowed to include "GNU is my reason to live" in dedication page or on
front page without them to be removed in derivate works. Why? Because
I should have the right to walk on streets safely.

Are you trying to decrease my freedom? 
As in GNU FDL reader or publisher of my document "pays" to me by
taking invarient sections with document. In GNU GPL user "pays" by
contributing changes. In both licenses user pays by contributing
changes. In both licenses there are things which have to be
included. Those things are actual licencing statements. If GNU FDL
forces one to include invarient sections, cover texts and
acknowledgements (if writer so chooses) then I dont see very big
difference from copyright texts from source files. Both just "have" to
be included and the actual "source" is changeable and readable with
ease with computers.

If people dont want to read my statements they can rip the off and use
them as toilet paper or throw them to trash can.

   Too late.  The mavens have spoken; we're keeping GFDL docs in main
   for Sarge (as I understand it) for much the same reason as non-free
   was created -- expediency, and because at this moment in time there
   aren't enough free alternatives.  And, as with non-free, sooner or
   later the non-free material will be rewritten under free licences,
   and GFDL documentation will be removed.

Well, that's intresting and important thing to know.

Internationale persona non grata

Reply to: