What does "free" means for a licence or a standard? (Was: Intent to package xmemos
[Thread sent to debian-legal.]
On Monday 29 March 1999, at 21 h 31, the keyboard of Dragon
<kysh@blackwolf.com> wrote:
> Has it occurred to anyone that the GPL isn't DFSG free? :> Not programs
> licensed under it, but the license itself, which cannot be modified or
> altered? :>
> Does this mean we have to move the GPL out of main? ;>
The GPL (and the DFSG, by the way) stands for software. For other stuff (documentation, literary work, art, standards, licences themselves), it is not obvious that "free" has the same meaning. And it is not obvious that the GPL is the best licence for these.
Remember the discussion on debian-legal a few days ago about the W3C standards? It makes sense to limit modifications on a standard. At the very least, if you modify and redistribute the GPL, it makes sense to force you to use another name... which the GPL does not require for software.
Reply to: