Re: Compatibility between CC licenses and the GPL
Mike Olson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> To the extent that the FSF is willing and able to clarify
> the point on documentation with the Debian leadership, [...]
That's nice to hear, but I think we got the point: FSF want to
be able to include unmodifiable adverts in manuals. (I know the
adverts are good things, but they are still unmodifiable things.)
Until FSF take a less arbitrary view of freedom, there might not
be common ground.
> [...] I believe the FSF speaks authoritatively
> on the meaning of the GPL, but I'll reiterate that the
> Debian leadership took a different view of the combination
> of docs under the CC A-SA and code under the GPL. If that
> remains true today, you've got a problem lurking out there.
Can someone give a reference for this claim about tbm's view?
I doubt someone as experienced as him would have said anything
contradicting FSF's view about aggregation. It depends what
you mean by "combination" - I doubt FSF would claim you can
paste CC A-SA material into a program and then release it