Re: License texts with invariant sections
On Wed, 2004-04-28 at 23:09, John Hasler wrote:
> Herbert Xu writes:
> > Here's an interesting thought. Suppose that we make such an exception
> > explicit that license texts are allowed to contain invariant sections.
> > Now what if I create a new license text and embed software documentation
> > inside it with cover text saying that the license text must be
> > distributed as a whole with no modifications?
> We will look at the thing, say "That's not a license", and refuse it.
> > Will you allow software that is distributed with this license to enter
> > main? If not then can you come up with a rule that is not ad hoc to
> > distinguish licenses such as these from the GPL?
> Yes. Common sense. The DFSG is not a computer program that must blindly
> churn through to a logical conclusion no matter how ludicrous. It is a set
> of legalistic rules and, like a law, should be interpreted in the context
> of the case at hand, relevant precedent, and the intent of it's authors.
> It is not necessary to have rules that can be applied clearly and
> unambiguously to every unforseen circumstance. This is fortunate, since it
> is not possible.
So how big can a preamble get (assuming here that "philosophical
documentation" comes under Debian's new definition of software)?