Endorsements (was Re: GPL compatibility of DFCL)
Wouldn't the endorsements issue be best resolved by licensing the
endorsements separately from the rest of the document? i.e. the core
content could be under the DFCL (unambiguously free & GPL compatible)
while endorsements, odes to pets, etc. would be under a separate
license of the original author's choosing.
The only other thing I can think of is some sort of "author
severability" clause (kind of like the use of "Alan Smithee" by film
directors): a provision that states any modification to sections A, B,
or C of the text requires the removal of the original author's name
from the text and/or a clear statement that the text is a modified
version of the author's work. IMHO that wouldn't run afoul of the
DFSG, as it is similar in spirit to DFSG clause 4. (Admittedly, some
people dislike the "patch files" section of Clause 4, but this
wouldn't be a patch files situation - it's analogous to the rename or
re-version portion.) That way if someone edits the GNU Manifesto to
add "RMS likes goats" halfway through, RMS can say "you can't call
that the GNU manifesto any more, even though I do, in fact, like
goats, and while you're at it take my damn name off!" (*).
Don't mind me, I'm not really awake :-)
Chris
--
Chris Lawrence <chris@lordsutch.com> - http://www.lordsutch.com/chris/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: