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

Re: The old DFSG-lemma again...

    > I think "scour" is too strong a word.  The invariant sections have to
    > be listed in the notice that says the work is under the GFDL.

    Yes, but again, you're relying on the honor system and hoping authors
    will be principled.

That is always true, for any license.  I explained that in my previous
message, and you responded "point taken".  So I am surprised you are
now once again presenting this as unique to the GFDL.

    The restrictions that come into force under the GNU FDL in the "Copying
    in Quantity" section, and the restrictions that are always in force for
    "standard (paper) book form" under the OPL look very, very similar to

The difference is that the GPL permits publication of modified
versions, even on paper, with certain labeling requirements.  The OPL,
if either of the options is used, does not permit this.  That is the
fundamental difference.

    I think authors of GNU FDL works should be encouraged to waive the
    "Copying in Quantity" section of the license if they wish, i.e., render
    it optional.  Is that something the FSF is willing to mull over?

Any copyright holder can give permission to disregard this requirement
if he wishes to.  I don't see a reason why they should do so, but if
you convince them to do so, they can do it without any change in the
GFDL itself.

Reply to: