Re: If DFSG apply to non-software, is GPL*L* incompatible with DFSG?
Don Armstrong <email@example.com>:
> > The legal terms are not copyrightable;
> In some jurisdictions, perhaps, but not all.
Indeed. I might be wrong here, but I think that one of the ways the
Law Society in England prevents non-solicitors from taking work away
from qualified lawyers is by asserting copyright on the standard terms
and conditions used for buying and selling property, say, and then
licensing those terms and conditions only to members of the Law
Society. They may also raise money by charging for the use of certain
I think that licence texts should be public-domain. You could
X11-license them, but it would be very confusing to have to carry
around a licence for the licence, not to mention a licence for the
licence for the licence, plus a few changelogs, perhaps, so public
domain is best for that particular purpose, I think.
Debian seems to allow the use of licences that are themselves
unmodifiable. It's a practical necessity, I think, and fairly easy to
justify by saying that licences are a kind of meta-content rather than
content of the distribution.