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

Re: Rejected Package - Licence question

Frank =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=FCster?= <frank@debian.org>
> Well, in that sense most other software licenses cover documentation,
> e.g. the GPL - that was the main point of my statement.  But I see no
> license that was specifically designed and worded to apply to
> "documentation but not programs", as many upstream authors seem to
> search.=20

That's because it's damn hard to define which is which and if you're
going to be vague about it, might as well cover all software.

I suspect it would be discriminating against a field of endeavour if
the documentation cannot be incorporated into a program.  One of my
favourite quotes again:
"We can't depend for the long run on distinguishing one bitstream from
another in order to figure out which rules apply." -- Eben Moglen,
FSF's general counsel, in Free Software and the Death of Copyright,
First Monday issue 4_8.

My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Reply to: