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

Re: The debate on Invariant sections (long)



On Tue, 13 May 2003 20:38:51 +0200
jmarant@nerim.net (Jérôme Marant) wrote:
> Could we consider some invariant sections as "non-problematic"?

Invariant sections aren't the only part of the license that's
problematic, they're just the most obscene. So far, I've seen them used
in a way that I found personally quite offensive. But I can't modify it,
so I'm screwed.

(Incidentally, copyright licenses are always considered "invariant" :)

> You mentioned in a previous mail packaging old versions of manuals.
> This is IMHO pretty useless because noone cares for outdated manuals.
> Althought people can be motivated in forking or reimplementing
> applications, I doubt anyone will be motivated enough to fork
> documentation and noone'll be able to be as up-to-date as the
> Emacs manual.

Agreed. I doubt anyone will be motivated enough to write a
Free typesetting application ... oh, wait.

I doubt anyone will be motivated enough to write a robust set of
graphics drivers for *nix ... oh, wait.

I doubt anyone will be motivated enough to write a license which ensures
that everybody will always have access to the source code of an
application ... oh, wait.

Maybe I don't agree.

Attachment: pgp7li0iiDUvH.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: