Re: The invariant sections are not forbidden by DFSG
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 11:19:34AM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> craig
> > the DFSG does not require convenience. it requires freedom. lack of
> > convenience DOES NOT equate to non-free.
> >
> > case in point - it is inconvenient (for both the distributor and the
> > user) to distribute modified software in the form of original work +
> > patch file. very inconvenient. in fact, a complete PITA, especially
> > for the user. yet that is explicitly defined as being free in the
> > DFSG.
>
> Even in that case, the used copy of the work usually has the
> patched-out part missing. I don't think the patch permission is
> relevant to the FDL, because most Invariant Section advertisers would
> be unhappy if their advert is not visible in an opaque copy. Not least
> FSF: would an invisible GNU manifesto satisfy their goal?
now you're using the "wilfully stupid misinterpretation" method of
lying. that's pretty lame, so your score today is only 1.5 out of 10.
the "patch" to the opinions/rants/whatever in an invariant section does
not change that invariant section (it can't change, it's *INVARIANT*).
It adds a NEW invariant section which makes whatever point the 'patcher'
wants to make. the new section may add to or clarify the original inv.
sec. or it may discredit it or subvert it or argue against it. or it may
be about something else entirely. it could even be an argument based on
a wilfully stupid misinterpretation of the original.
craig
--
craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au> (part time cyborg)
Reply to: