Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal
On 2003-09-09 17:29:41 +0100 Mathieu Roy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
("non-free" := everything, except it is "free"; "free" := meets the
So a country were you are free to kill a girl without any legal risk
is a country DFSG compliant?
That is not what has been said to you many times. Despite this point
being made to you many times without complaint, this time you
misinterpret it YET AGAIN. Despite the description from the URL in
your signature, I suspect you are doing this deliberately to obstruct
debate of the FDL.
I think that the following article explains well why not everybody
agree that texts and softwares require the exact same freedom:
You are entitled to your opinion, which may agree with RMS but may not
be the consensus opinion of this list. Personally, I want free
manuals and believe that it is desirable for people to have permission
to modify the entire manual, not just sections of it. I am not
motivated to encourage proprietary manual publishers to produce free
manuals. My views are far closer to
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html translated to all
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ email@example.com
Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/