Re: Anton's amendment

[Anton Zinoviev <anton@lml.bas.bg>]

On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 11:00:34PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> 
>         Yes, I am uneasy myself on that clause. But see, I regard
>  removal of copyright notices as prohibited by copyright law, and if
>  the original program displayed copyright notices, not being able to
>  remove those notices from the displayed text is closer in spirit to
>  the non-removal of copyright notices from the sources that I think it
>  passes my "is free" radar.

I can see why you are uneasy with that clause - it makes impossible to
just say "arbitrary modification".  And the clause we are talking
about is not the only necessary exception for "arbitrary
modification".  If you say that the non-removal of those notices from
the displayed text passes your "is free" radar and the invariant
secondary sections do not pass -- I can acknowledge this and I
understand this.  However I don't understand why you think that your
interpretation is the only one possible -- it is not.

Anton Zinoviev