Re: A clarification for my interpretation of GFDL
On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 12:33:34PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> >
> > Ok. However so far, nobody could give a resonable example of needs
> > that can require you to remove the secodary sections.
>
> No, several people have. You just don't want to accept these, and
> therefore each time one example is mentioned, you start arguing about
> small details and only concede the others are right step by step, until
> nobody knows whether you have been proven wrong by the example or until
> nobody cares enough to further discuss your statements.
I'll try to list the examples I can remember.
Category 1. GFDL prohibits some particular use of the document but
some other free license also prohibits this use.
This category includes:
1. Printed newssheets. There is no space for the invariant sections
but there is no space for the text of the license either and many
licenses require you to ship the full text of the license. Not to
say that some licenses would make necessary to distribute the
sources together with the newssheets.
2. Compilation works. Such works are based on many different
documents and as a result the volume of all invariant sections for
the resulting document can be too big. However DFSG accept as free
some licenses that prohibit any compilation works.
Category 2. GFDL adds some inconvenience for some particular use of
the document, but it doesn't prohibit this use.
During the previous discussions we agreed that there cases when the
inconvenience can be prohibitive if you want to give away copies at no
cost on expensive media. This category includes:
1. Reference card with Emacs commands printed on single sheet of
paper. In this case you can accompany the reference card with the
invariant sections printed on additional sheets.
2. The same, but the Emacs (or vi) commands are printed on cup. In
this case you can accompany the cup with the invariant sections
printed on additional sheets of paper.
3. Embedded device where one has to be economical about the disk
space. This is only an inconvenience because the user is not
obliged to install the invariant sections on the device.
4. Distribution via expensive media such as SMS. When the document is
distributed in HTML-format you don't have to put everything in one
file and the user is not obliged to download all invariant sections
in order to read one specific short chapter. The same trick can
work for distribution via SMS. You only have to make sure that all
components of the document are equaly available.
Category 3. The invariant sections of some hypothetical document are
so lengthy that they are obstructing the users to really
excercise the rights they have acorging to GFDL. Such a
document would be non-free.
Anton Zinoviev
Reply to: