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

Re: Clarifying non-free parts of the GNU FDL

On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 10:51:01 -0700 Josh Triplett wrote:

> Another possibility is to simply use the GPL, and grant exceptions for
> various cases.  Given that an ideal Free documentation license would
> be GPL-compatible (if not the GPL itself, which is pretty ideal), and
> that any GPL-compatible license must not have any restrictions that
> are not in the GPL (so it must consist of some subset of the GPL's
> conditions), then that GPL-compatible documentation license could
> instead be written as a set of exceptions to the GPL.
> For example, if one wanted to permit distributors of physical copies
> to refuse to provide source, then that could be written as an
> exception.(I personally think it is a good idea to require
> distributors, both physical and electronic, to provide source. 
> However, many people wish to waive this condition for convenience, and
> that's fine; the resulting license would still be free, just less of a
> copyleft.)

Agreed fully.
The GPL *is* suitable for documentation.
And providing source is indeed important in order to permit the
recipient to fully exercise the freedoms we value...

          Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday.
    Francesco Poli                            GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpYADMHwS4XO.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: