Re: "Robinson, Nerode and other free beer zealots" was: A possible GFDL compromise
On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 05:41:52AM +0900, Fedor Zuev wrote:
> There a lot of people in this list, who cares very much
> about cost ("Invariant Sections is clearly non-free"), but cares
I don't see what that has to do with cost.
> very little about liberty ("Discrimination toward DRM is non-free
> too"). It will be coherent to call such people a free beer zealots.
I think stating that "banning discrimination against DRM is non-free" is an
argument trivially inconsistent with the DFSG, as licenses such as the GPL
already, in effect, do that, given that the effect of most DRM systems is to
prevent the recipient of an item from copying it on to someone else.
However, I'm not sure that anyone here has actually made *that* argument.
Many have said that the anti-DRM clause in the GFDL is non-free, which is a
whole different matter, because that clause may be construed as vague enough
to encompass non-DRM technologies in its zeal to ban DRM.
Reply to: