Re: [libreplanet-discuss] GFDL with Invariant Sections or other unmodifiable parts. Was: Final Thesis: H-node

[Michał 'rysiek' Woźniak]

Dnia niedziela, 19 maja 2013 o 15:20:25 Thomas Harding napisał(a):
> Le 19/05/2013 14:52, Michael Dorrington a écrit :
> > I posted in December 2012 and January 2013 to this list about how
> > including manuals which are under the GFDL with Invariant Sections or
> > other unmodifiable parts (which is similar to a CC with ND licence) in a
> > distribution makes that distribution non-free.  The FSF agree in this
> > article:
> > 
> > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/copyright-and-globalization.html#opinions
> 
> [..]
> 
> > However, the FSF still distribute manuals under the GFDL with Invariant
> > Sections or other unmodifiable parts.
> > 
> > The FSF's "Guidelines for Free System Distributions" does not forbid the
> > inclusion of manuals under this licence so a distribution conforming to
> > those guidelines does not mean it is free.  And, for example, Trisquel
> > includes such manuals in its repo which (I assume) is setup on install
> > thus making Trisquel a non-free distribution.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > How can we get the FSF to recognise this and so change the licence it
> > uses for its manuals to be a free one?
> 
> This is one historical point of disagreement between
> Debian(FSGuidelines)/FSF,
> and has been highly discussed. Unfortunately...
> 
> Sometimes opinions are not flexible: you should wait for a good
> circumstance.
> 
> This thread and issued document by Michal could emphasize the problem, but
> you're pleased to find a solution ;)

The solution is a reasoned debate with the FSF and GNU communities to try and 
convince them why -ND/GNU Verbatim is not a good idea. ;)

-- 
Pozdrawiam
Michał "rysiek" Woźniak

Fundacja Wolnego i Otwartego Oprogramowania

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.