Re: Anton's amendment

[Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>]

Anton Zinoviev <anton@lml.bas.bg> writes:

>> I have not yet seen such an interpretation of this sort, in which
>> explanation and analysis of similar cases and such is proffered.  This
>> does not mean it cannot be done, but it has not.  
>
> This interpretation is not ad-hoc thing and I strongly belive that it
> represents not only my view but also the view of FSF.  I asked Richard
> Stallman for confirmation and I will report here when I receive his
> reply.

The DFSG says *nothing* about "functional parts", and was recently
amended *specifically* to clarify that the same conditions apply to
software and programs.

To interpret the DFSG to read into it language about functional parts
or to have different standards for programs and documentation, is to
insert something that is simply not there.

Thomas