New draft of GFDL and GSFDL

[Nathanael Nerode <neroden@fastmail.fm>]

Time to see what we would need to change to make it DFSG-free.

On a quick readthrough of the SFDL, it looks like this to me:

* Unlike the GFDL, no Invariant Sections or Cover Texts.
  And they can't be added, so it doesn't break copyleft.
* "Transparent" and "Opaque" definitions look OK this time.
* The anti-DRM clause looks like it's still problematic.  It appears to
  prohibit parallel distribution, because it applies to *any copies*.  It
  should be written to apply to *any recipient*, not any copy.  This is the
  prime point which should be fixed.
* The requirement to include the license in the work, rather than making
  it accompany the work, is made much less obnoxious by the "excerpt" clause.
* The mandatory "History" section is irritating, but much like a Changelog,
  so probably DFSG-free.
* Acknowledgements and Dedications could be non-free requirements if they
  were abused, but I'm not sure.  I think the requirements are free in this
  draft, because
  - only applies to actual acknowledgements and dedications
  - only applies when the acknowledged/dedicated work is still present
  - may make modifications which preserve the "substance and tone"

In conclusion, on a first glance, I think the only clause I really want
to get changed is the anti-DRM clause.

-- 
Nathanael Nerode  <neroden@fastmail.fm>

Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/