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

Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal

On 2003-09-11, Mathieu Roy <yeupou@gnu.org> wrote:
> Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org> a tapoté :
>> On Tuesday, Sep 9, 2003, at 07:12 US/Eastern, Mathieu Roy wrote:
>> >> Please review the archive.  GFDL is non-free even without invariant
>> >> sections, due to the anti-DMCA clause.
>> >
>> > This has been discussed recently and it was so not clear.
>> The poll held recently made it very clear. Who has changed their
>> position since then?
> A poll gives an overview of the feelings of people participating to
> the poll. It does not at all prove that something is right or wrong.
> Right now I listed 3 problems:
>         - invariant section ...
>         - anti-DMCA clause...
>         - transparent clause...

What's the status of other invariant or pseudo-invariant sections,
like History and Cover Text?

And Branden Robinson mentioned unease with the clauses on mass
copying.  Have they been considered carefully yet?

	Dylan Thurston

Reply to: