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

Re: A possible GFDL compromise

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 16:25:27 -0400
bts@alum.mit.edu (Brian T. Sniffen) wrote:
> David B Harris <david@eelf.ddts.net> writes:
> > Less likely, though I certainly wouldn't say it's impossible, is a judge
> > ruling that without providing electricity, a working computer with a CD
> > reader, and a technician to operate it and read the words aloud,
> > distributing the documentation on a standard ISO9660 CD is in violation
> > of the license.
> >
> > (Yes, the above is a deliberately silly example. It's obsurd. If a judge
> > did maintain that position, we would all think the judge is nuts. But
> > there are judges that are nuts when it comes to technology - a LOT of
> > them. The example is meant to show a flaw in the GFDL.)
> Actually, isn't there a complicated set of trademark and patent claims
> preventing manufacture of a CD reader without paying money to Phillips
> and some trade organizations?  This may not be that ridiculous.

(s/obsurd/absurd/, BTW :)

You mean if Phillips is the distributor? That's certainly what the
clause in the GFDL is supposed to prevent (people making proprietary
formats, charging for access to them or their decoders, then releasing
GFDL'd documentation under that format), so perhaps.

I don't know the details about the CD market though :)

Attachment: pgp3Bh_20uXUV.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: