Re: Question about GPL and DFSG Compatibility of a Proposed Amendment to the W3C Document Licence

[Walter Landry <wlandry@caltech.edu>]

Walter Landry <wlandry@caltech.edu> wrote:
> Option 1

As noted, the clause 

   HOWEVER, the publication of derivative works of this document for
   use as a technical specification is expressly prohibited.

makes the license incompatible with the DFSG, so I will not spend any
time on any other parts.

> Option 2
> --------
> Copyright © 2011 W3C ® (MIT, ERCIM, Keio), All Rights Reserved. W3C
> liability and trademark rules apply. The W3C Document License applies
> to this document as a whole; however, to facilitate implementation of
> the technical specifications set forth in this document you may:
> 
>    1. copy and modify, without limitation, any code, pseudo-code,
>       schema, data tables, cascading style sheets, interface
>       definition language, and header text in this document in source
>       code for implementation of the technical specifications, and
> 
>    2. copy and modify reasonable portions of this document for
>       inclusion in software such as, for example, in source code
>       comments, commit messages, documentation of software, test
>       materials, user-interface messages, and supporting materials
>       accompanying software, all in accordance with good software
>       engineering practices, and
> 
>    3. include reasonable portions of this document in research
>       materials and publications.

I would say that this option fails the DFSG because it only allows
copying and modification of "reasonable" amounts.  It would also be
incompatible with the GPL, so I do not understand why Eben Moglen
would say that it is compatible.

> Option 3
> --------
> Copyright © 2011 W3C® (MIT, ERCIM, Keio).
> 
> W3C liability and trademark rules apply.
> 
> As a whole, this document may be used according to the terms of the
> W3C Document License. In addition:
> 
>     * To facilitate implementation of the technical specifications set
>       forth in this document, anyone may prepare and distribute
>       derivative works and portions of this document in software, in
>       supporting materials accompanying software, and in documentation
>       of software, PROVIDED that all such works include the notice
>       below.
>     * Furthermore, all code, pseudo-code, schema, data tables,
>       cascading style sheets, and interface definition language is
>       licensed under the W3C Software License, LGPL 2.1, and MPL 1.1.

So what if I want to make derivative works that do not facilitate
implementation of the specifications?  What if Neal Stephenson writes
a GPL-licensed book that includes the standard but modified by an evil
megacorp for nefarious purposes?  If that is allowed, then I have no
problem with this license.

Also, I noticed on the page you referenced the summary

  Summary

  With this as background, the three licenses can be summarized as follows:

    * Option 1 Broad reuse in software and software documentation to
      implement the specification, with an explicit field of use
      restriction.

    * Option 2 Reuse of reasonable portions in software and software
      documentation to implement the specification consistent with
      good engineering practices, with no field of use restriction
      thereafter.

    * Option 3 Broad reuse in software and software documentation to
      implement the specification, with an implicit field of use
      restriction.

If they believe that, then Option 3 is incompatible with the DFSG and
the GPL.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
wlandry@caltech.edu