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

Re: The draft Position statement on the GFDL

Scripsit Raul Miller <moth@debian.org>
> On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 11:55:28AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:

> > How would you suggest solving it, given that you should be able to make
> > a derived work of the document as a whole without just referencing it?

> There are at least three solutions:
> [1] Add more original content
> [2] Let the document be referenced under its original title.
> [3] Strip out more of the bulk from the GFDL document.

These are three non-solutions with respect to the freedom to make
arbitrary functional modifications to the work - which lies that the
very core of the DFSG.

> > A Free license should allow you to create a derivative work of the
> > document, instead of just referring to it.

> It does.

Not if it only allows derivative works that comply with the three
non-solution you list above.

> I think it would be better to copy the ideas and not the content.

Feel free to think so. However, freedom is also the freedom to do
modifications that Raul Miller does not think makes sense.

DFSG-freedom is the freedom to copy *content*.

Henning Makholm       "It was intended to compile from some approximation to
                 the M-notation, but the M-notation was never fully defined,
                because representing LISP functions by LISP lists became the
 dominant programming language when the interpreter later became available."

Reply to: