Re: Documentation licenses (GFDL discussion on debian-legal)
Eric Baudais <email@example.com> writes:
> If you have an interest in a flame war please keep it in debian-legal.
We have our share; we don't need any more. ;) Especially on this
> "If a section does not fit the above definition of Secondary then it
> is not allowed to be designated as Invariant."
> "A 'Secondary Section' is a named appendix or a front-matter section of
> the Document that deals exclusively with the relationship of the
> publishers or authors of the Document to the Document's overall subject
> (or to related matters) and contains nothing that could fall directly
> within that overall subject."
This is the crux of the matter. There are other issues (requirements
on the form that additions to the history section must take, for
example, that seem excessive) but this is the main issue. So what is
a Secondary Section? You feel, evidently, that this is just referring
to licensing info:
> The only text which can be an invariant section is
> the text pertaining to the author's relationship to the document. This
> means the author's copyright, his license, and any other historical
> licenses which apply to the document.
But that fails to take into account things like the GNU manifesto (not
that I have anything against the GNU manifesto -- far from it). If I
wish to attach a political screed or "Ode to my Cat" simply because I
feel it's relevant to my relationship with my document (perhaps my cat
gave me the emotional support to write the document), why should that
be considered Free?
Jeremy Hankins <firstname.lastname@example.org>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03