Re: Interpreting the GFDL GR
Scripsit Jeremy Hankins <nowan@nowan.org>
> Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> writes:
>> Therefore my proposal is to narrow the licensor's-intent principle to
>> clauses of the general kind that are problematic in the GFDL. The
>> description in point (a) above is my best attempt to define such a
>> "general kind" of restrictions without being too much a GFDL-specific
>> exemption.
> I think your suggestion is the best chance at making sense of the GR
> that I've seen so far, but I would make one change: it *should* in fact
> be applicable only to the GFDL.
Doing so would mean that we'd need to have a separate GR for each
problematic license we encounter. We have to try to extract some
general principles from it, or everything becomes a farce.
> One could interpret the GR as a judgement call on the part of the
> developers that we will give the FSF the benefit of the doubt in
> this case. As such, it's not reasonable to extend that same benefit
> to other licenses or license authors without another GR that covers
> those cases as well.
I am strongly opposed to give the FSF any particular benefit of doubt
that does not apply to equally other licensors. In my opinion the
actions of the FSF in recent years have shown that they are not worthy
of such a singular benefit.
--
Henning Makholm "We cannot time-travel in this dimension. Everything
is arranged differently, and they use different plugs."
Reply to: