Re: A possible GFDL compromise: a proposal
Would you accept a similar restriction in a software license, and
still call the license free? (Say, one which said "you must always
distribute this function as part of the system".)
Yes, and the case of TeX is an example. It requires more than just
one function that you must include. I think Debian regards this
license as free.
Ah! So I think we have made progress. This is just what people have
said about why a practical inconvenience, sometimes, makes a thing
nonfree. Now the question is: how impractical does it have to be?
It has to be prohibitively impractical in real cases. The
inconveniences that occur in some cases with the GFDL are not
Debian especially is concerned with the fact that we can't imagine all
the future ways of publishing. How can we tell that it isn't a
We have to try. If we accept this, or any, reason to say that any
requirement might perhaps be prohibitive, and reject any and all
requirements, that leaves rather few acceptable licenses. Maybe none.