El Domingo 24 Abril 2005 04:39, Adeodato Simó escribió: > * Cesar Martinez Izquierdo [Sun, 24 Apr 2005 04:15:28 +0300]: > > El Viernes 22 Abril 2005 14:57, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh escribió: > > > On Fri, 22 Apr 2005, Maciej Dems wrote: > > > > I have a simple question concerning the GFDL discussion. > > > > > > For which the simple answer is: > > > Read http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.xhtml > > > > I have the same question around for some months. > > I have read the link above but I didn't find any reply. > > Any extra clue? > > Well, from the above document: > > The problems with the GFDL fall into three major categories, which > are treated in detail below. > > - The DRM Restriction > - Transparent And Opaque Copies > - Invariant Sections > > As the original question was: > > Does the GFDL documentation which currently does not contain any > > invariant section have to go to non-free as well? > > , the remaining issues seem pretty easy to deduce. > > HTH,
Well, I should have elaborated a bit more. Of course I guess the remaining issues are DRM and transparent and opaque copies. While I find these "features" of the license really inconvenient and I wouldn't use this license for my documentation, I fail to see which section of DFSG is infringed by them. César
