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

Re: GFDL discussion at Advogato

"Michael D. Crawford" <crawford@goingware.com> wrote:
> I just submitted an article entitled "Which License for Free
> Documentation?" to
> http://advogato.org/
> I have several documents that are licensed under the GFDL.  While
> I'm not sure I agree with your position about the GFDL, I can
> understand why you feel that way, so I posted the article to ask for
> advice on what other license I should use if I want to get my work
> included in Debian.
> The full text is at: http://advogato.org/article/682.html

In that article, you wrote:

  Another course of action, although a lengthy and difficult one,
  would be to work to convince the Debian community that the
  requirement that one's opinions not be misrepresented in derivative
  works should not make the document non-free.

Debian has no problem with this requirement.  In particular, section 4
of the DFSG says in part

  The license may require derived works to carry a different name or
  version number from the original software.

What Debian objects to is preventing people from modifying a text at
all, even if it is clear that it is not your thoughts anymore.

Walter Landry

Reply to: