Re: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta
Sam Hocevar <email@example.com> wrote: [...]
> 1. The GPLv3: the latest draft did not raise major objections from
> -legal and despite its concerns with the strategies developed in some
> sections, Debian does consider it DFSG-free. [...]
A big one of those concerns is the way it combines barely-related topics
of copyright and patents into one licence. The FSF has been warning for
years against 'Intellectual Property' confusion, so it is surprising to
see the GPL becoming more of an IP licence, helping to spread software
patent licensing into swpat-free jurisdictions. Will they stop that?
In practical terms, it seems to be combined copyright-trademark licences
that cause more problems for debian and GPL is no worse in that way.
While I'm writing anyway:
> 2. The GFDL: [...]
FDL, please. It's not GGPL.
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct