Re: Anton's amendment
* Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> [060207 00:19]:
> so make your reference card and include a link to the FSF's site for the
> full documentation. one link hardly even qualifies as inconvenient.
Huh? I thought we are speaking about GFDL, where invariant sections
have to be "Preserve all the Invariant Sections of the Document,
unaltered in their text and in their titles. Section numbers or the
equivalent are not considered part of the section titles."
> even if you couldn't include a link and had to include the entire invariant
> section, you're still only talking about a convenience issue NOT A FREEDOM
> ISSUE.
Most freedom issues are only convenience issues:
"The freedom to study how the program works,"
This can also be done in the binary, well, not really, but that is
clearly only a convienience issue.
"and adapt it to your needs"
Here it gets a bit terse, but at least German law allows to modify the
running image of a program. That this is possible (an thus source code
is only convience) show hundreds of cracks/ehancements for programs.
So, only a convience issue, too.
Going further, only the right to redistribute is not convenience,
but if paper/print/bandwidth/storage costs are just convenience, why
not label a small fee (like at four digits) for copying as convenience,
too?
Freedom is always about convienience, a freedom you are not
realistically able to use is no freedom for you.
Bernhard R. Link
Reply to: