On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 01:00:47PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > There seem to be someone believing that standard documents should be > treated as software. Standards are not software. Standards do not > improve if everyone is allowed to modify them and publish the modified > version as an updated version of the standard.
There's no need to. But I want to have the right to change a standard slightly, and hand it around, telling people that this is how I would have liked the standard. I also want to have the right to enhance or even change a standard, and use it e.g. for some internal project. I want to quote parts of the standard in other documents or my software (maybe even outside the "fair use" constraints). I might not be allowed to do that. There might be other restrictions as well. I don't want to have the right to call these modified documents "RFCs" or "standards", though. Please don't confuse these two issues. This is something that we already allow - see some software licenses that we consider free that require derived versions of the software to change the name of the software. - Sebastian
