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

Re: GFDL v2 draft 1 analysis [long]



On Sat, 23 Dec 2006 20:43:40 +0100 Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 05:36:05PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > :::: Improvable: still suboptimal definition of "Transparent" copy
> 
> > The definition of "Transparent" copy is improved with respect to
> > GFDL 1.2, but it's still suboptimal, IMO.  In some cases, we could
> > end up in a situation where no "Transparent" version of the work
> > exist anymore (for instance, after modifying the work with a
> > proprietary word processor that saves in a closed-spec format): at
> > that point it would become impossible to comply with the requirement
> > of section 3. (COPYING IN QUANTITY).
> 
> I think this is entirely done on purpose, to avoid establishing a
> "tax" to edition of the document: anybody wishing to modify it having
> to acquire the proprietary word processor - and the OS it runs on -
> and to agree to their despicable, hated licences. ("despicable and
> hated licences" are words I put in the mouth of the drafters of the
> GFDL, not an expression of my judgement.)
> 
> So they somehow require that the work be editable with free tools by
> requiring it be available in an "open" format. To speak in Debian
> terms, they want the copyleft to be so strong that the work cannot
> fall from "main" to "contrib", which the GPL-copyleft allows as far as
> I remember.

As you yourself note, the GNU GPL has no equivalent requirement.
You can take a GPLed work and modify it, after changing its source form
(such as translating a program from Python to C++, for instance): if the
new source form requires some proprietary tools (such as a proprietary
compiler, for instance), so be it.
It's of course undesireable for a work to require proprietary tools in
order to be modified (or even used), but I think that this should not be
forbidden by its license.


P.S.: Please do not reply to me and the list, as I didn't ask to be
copied.  I am a debian-legal subscriber, and I don't need to read
replies twice.  Thanks.

-- 
But it is also tradition that times *must* and always
do change, my friend.   -- from _Coming to America_
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpBRxyHSWRh3.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: