Re: Prefered License for forums content
Wouter Vanden Hove wrote:
> Josh Triplett wrote:
>> Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
>>>MJ Ray <email@example.com> writes:
>> Recall that the Creative Commons Attribution license was ruled to be
>> DFSG-non-free by debian-legal (initial review request at
>> , final summary at
> "When any Licensor asks, all references to their name(s) must be purged
> from the work. This restricts modification (DFSG 3)."
> This is an unalienable moral right in most of Europe.
No, it isn't. Or, anyway, I sure as hell hope not.
Let me state this simply and clearly.
If I state in my work, which is a derivative of RMS's, "I disagree with RMS
about XXXX", or "RMS founded the FSF", where does he get off demanding that
I remove his name?
> If this is DFSG
> non-free, then Debian has a serious problem, because then is it
> logically impossible to have a license that is compatible with the DFSG
> and European Law at the same time.
>> The by-sa license is likely to be non-free as well for the same
> If people think that, we don't they express their opinion about it on
> the relevant mailinglist, namely firstname.lastname@example.org?
I thought that was an alias to /dev/null, for all the responses I got from
the request to change the HTML pages so that it was clear that the
trademark stuff wasn't part of the license.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.