Re: SURVEY: Is the GNU FDL a DFSG-free license?
Before I reply, I should add I still see it as wrong and misleading to apply
*software* guidelines to *documentation*, which to me are fundamentally
different beasts. Thus, I see the question as rather misleading.
However, with the question narrowly framed as it is, regarding applying
the DFSG to the GFDL, I would concur as listed below.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 12:09:54AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [ ] The GNU Free Documentation License, version 1.2, as published
> by the Free Software Foundation, is not a license compatible
> with the Debian Free Software Guidelines. Works under this
> license would require significant additional permission
> statements from the copyright holder(s) for a work under this
> license to be considered Free Software and thus eligible for
> inclusion in the Debian OS.
If you hold this opinion, be aware that this would only work if that
permission is not specific to Debian.
> [X ] The GNU Free Documentation License, version 1.2, as published
> by the Free Software Foundation, can be a license compatible
> with the Debian Free Software Guidelines, but only if certain
> restrictions stated in the license are not exercised by the
> copyright holder with respect to a given work. Works under
> this license will have to be scrutinized on a case-by-case
> basis for us to determine whether the work can be be considered
> Free Software and thus eligible for inclusion in the Debian OS.
> [ ] None of the above statements approximates my opinion.
> Part 2. Status of Respondent
> Please mark with an "X" the following item only if it is true.
> [X ] I am a Debian Developer as described in the Debian
> Constitution as of the date on this survey.