Re: GPL as documentation license
On Thu, 3 Sep 1998, Lyno Sullivan wrote:
> I read the "Linux Documentation Project Copying License" at
> <http://sunsite.unc.edu/linux/LDP-COPYRIGHT.html>
>
> If this the license you mean?
Nope. :-) The LDP license is more restrictive of modification and less
copylefting than the one the FSF uses. It isn't a free license, and you
pointed out some other issues.
> Is there a URL for this license that will be
> permanent for the foreseeable future?
I don't know, but
http://www.debian.org/~hp/tutorial/COPYING
is my copy of it. Not guaranteed to stay there. Note that the optional
distribution under the GPL is not in the FSF version; I have to use that
since it was on the LDP User's Manual (which is not under the LDP License,
perhaps due to its age).
If your documentation or "digital object" has a significant source code
component and is thus "software-like," the GPL may be better. However for
something like the tutorial the markup is trivial and it isn't worth
placing a burden on people who would like to make paper or HTML copies
available. (plus it isn't clear which is the source and which the compiled
file out of SGML, HTML, Texinfo, etc.)
Havoc
Reply to: