Re: [long] Last call draft of GPL v3

[Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au>]

Thanks again, Francesco, for a thorough coverage of this latest GPLv3
draft.

Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it> writes:

> Since the GPL is designed to be applicable to any work of authorship
> (not only computer programs), I once again suggest using a more
> neutral term than "the Program".  Something like "the Work" would
> avoid misleading many many people into thinking that the GPL can
> only be applied to computer programs.

My understanding of FSF's position for many years is that the GPL was
designed only for computer programs. They agree that it *can* be
applied to non-program works of authorship, and that the result is
free software, but I think it's untrue to say it was *designed* to be
applicable that way.

I agree that the GPL is the best FSF license to be applied to any work
of authorship, but the FSF don't agree -- and I believe they expressed
this disagreement long before they started promoting other licenses
designed for non-program works.

If you wish to express this argument, I think you'll need to base it
on something other than "the GPL is designed to be applicable to any
work of authorship".

-- 
 \       "The generation of random numbers is too important to be left |
  `\                                 to chance."  -- Robert R. Coveyou |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney