Re: A clarification for my interpretation of GFDL
On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 06:52:45PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> You're talking about the patch clause? Many others have, IMO
> convincingly, explained why a patch clause does not prohibit to combine
> two or more works.
I belived that any license using the patch clause would make the
combined works impossible and the others showed me that this is
possible with some licenses. On the other hand at least for QPL it is
quiet obvious that the combined works are impossible [*]. The
discussion has not finished yet, we have to determine exact conditions
in the license that make the combined works impossible. In order to
simplify the discussion I promised to post a message with my
conclusions and I haven't done this yet.
> > 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.
>
> How is he not? In other words, how can we distribute the manual to him
> without the invariant sections in the package?
If we want we can do this the same way as in 4. However here I only
wrote that the user doesn't have to install the invariant sections,
not that we have to distribute the manual without the invariant
sections.
> > 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.
>
> I'm not sure that the license allows this.
>
> > 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.
>
> What do you mean by this? Which rights specifically?
Theoretically it is possible to make the invariant sections so lengthy
that nobody would make printed copies. This is obstruction of the
right to make printed copies.
Anton Zinoviev
[*] http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2006/02/msg00224.html
Reply to: