Re: Anton's amendment
At Fri, 03 Feb 2006 16:46:47 -0300,
Daniel Ruoso wrote:
>
> Em Qui, 2006-02-02 às 02:11 +0200, Yavor Doganov escreveu:
> > | Everything must be modifiable
>
> I'm still not convinced GPL prevents that. You're still allowed to
> rephrase the copyright,no-warrant,where-is-the-license notices and to
> present it in a way that fits to your needs. It doesn't force you to use
> in the same way and with the same text the original author did.
Well, it is not said explicitly, so this is an interpretation. I'm
quite certain that rephrasing is not allowed. I really don't like
dissections of licenses, but if I write a GUI program that shows that
notice moving on the status bar (or as a background, ala "Star Wars"
movie), I guess your fork must include the same. Such notices may
contain stuff like "Thanks to my wife for the patience" or "This is
the power of Objective-C. Try GNUstep, step into the freedom!".
I understand that you see this as a "different kettle of fish",
otherwise you would have to accept that the absurd reading of DFSG 3
("must allow arbitrary modifications") is indeed absurd.
In the case of GNU Emacs, the authors considered natural, even
necessary, to include the GNU Manifesto in the manual. People that
don't like it or aren't interested may skip it; it doesn't prevent the
manual to be improved (which in fact happens extremely often). Since
GNU Emacs, the first component of the GNU operating system, is
considered by many as a bastion of freedom, I am really amazed that
there are people who think that the GNU Emacs Manual is non-free -- I
think those people do not have a proper sense of software freedom. (I
know, that's not an argument, but the freedom cannot be defined or
defended with dry arguments, you have to use your sense sometimes.)
[And BTW, Frank can still print Emacs commands on coffee cups and
distribute them without the invariant sections, since Emacs' commands
are knowledge, and knowledge is not copyrightable. You cannot
copyright Ohm's Law.]
--
Yavor Doganov
Reply to: