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

Re: If not GFDL, then what?

On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 05:00:16PM +0000, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> I would recommend the GNU General Public License, version 2. This
> accomplishes your goals, and it is unequivocally free.

I have equivocated on its freeness before, with respect to clauses 2a)
and 2c).

Also, I see no reason the author can't dual-license under the GNU GPL
and and the GNU FDL.  It might be easier to get the publisher to go
along with that if they've already bought into the rhetoric that the
GNU GPL is an "inappropriate" license for printed documentation.

G. Branden Robinson                |     Software engineering: that part of
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     computer science which is too
branden@debian.org                 |     difficult for the computer
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |     scientist.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: