[okfn-discuss] Guide to open licensing
Wookey
wookey at aleph1.co.uk
Wed Sep 5 00:36:50 UTC 2007
On 2007-09-03 22:33 +0100, Jonathan wrote:
> Thanks for your comments, Rob!
>
> > I am concerned about the FDL comment that recommends ammending Section 2
> > of the licence. The modified licence would not be the FDL and would
> > therefore be incompatible with the FDL. This comment should therefore be
> > removed.
> >
>
> Is this alright with others on the list? I didn't take part in
> discussions about DRM in the GFDL and wasn't involved in drafting this
> bit of the licensing page. It'd be great to hear what everyone thinks.
The GFDL is a problematic license, as explained in the Debian document
you link to. That covers the issue with why section 2 as it stands
makes the license non-(DFSG)-free under the heading "The DRM restriction".
I'd put other less-problematic licences further up the list, as
encouraging people to use the GFDL is a mistake IMHO, until the FSF
release a better version. Currently slated for 'later in 2006' I see...
(Yes it is ridiculous that the FSF's free documentation licence isn't
adequately free, but there you go - that seems to be where we've been
at for quite a few years now - even worse is the continued absence of
good copyleft alternatives. I find choosing a free licence for my
documentation currently a very unsatisfactory experience, and keep
hoping someone (preferably the FSF) will fix things).
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Balloonz - Toby Churchill - Aleph One - Debian
http://wookware.org/
More information about the okfn-discuss
mailing list