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

Re: A possible GFDL compromise

On Sat, Sep 06, 2003 at 08:16:11PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:

> No, prohibiting DRM systems is unambiguously non-free under the DFSG.
> It just happens to be _silly_ right now.

Er. How's that again?

How is this significantly different than section 6 of the GPL, which
forbids you from putting any further restrictions on anyone who receives a
copy (the inherent purpose of DRM systems, presumably, being to limit how
far a copy can propagate, the antithesis of Free documentation).

Or am I missing something glaringly obvious here?
Joel Baker <fenton@debian.org>                                        ,''`.
Debian GNU NetBSD/i386 porter                                        : :' :
                                                                     `. `'

Attachment: pgp4SEgKZ42CZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: