Anton Zinoviev <anton@lml.bas.bg> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 01:41:42PM +0000, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > I think the following is an useful test. If the license forbids some
>> >> > modification that is necessary in order to adapt the document to some
>> >> > need, then the document is non-free. Otherwise, that is if the
>> >> > license does not forbid any necessary modification, the document may
>> >> > be free.
>> >>
>> >> This is no good. Where is it defined what is "necessary", and who
>> >> deems what is "necessary"? What /I/ consider to be necessary may be
>> >> considered "unnecessary" (and hence, not allowed) by the copyright
>> >> holders.
>> >
>> > I don't think we disagree what "necessary" means.
>>
>> Please answer the question I asked: Where is it defined what is
>> "necessary", and who deems what is "necessary"?
>
> OK. The modification is necessary in order to adapt the document to
> some need if there is no way to adapt the document to serve the
> purpose in question without this modification.
Please could you still answer my question: *Who* defines what is
"necessary"?
Your partial answer above also appears to be nothing more than your
personal opinion. Can you properly justify your reasoning with a
detailed rationale? I think we need something rather more concrete
than the personal opinion of a single developer for something which
has important ramifications. It's all still rather too vague and
handwavy to be of any practical use.
Regards,
Roger
--
Roger Leigh
Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/
Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/
GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848. Please sign and encrypt your mail.
Attachment:
pgp69GQ9VT9oN.pgp
Description: PGP signature