On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 11:19:45AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > In any event, RMS has asserted that he is not going to change how the > Emacs Manual is licensed. We could decree that the GNU Emacs Manual, as > presently licensed under the GNU FDL, is DFSG-Free, and you *still* > wouldn't have the right-of-partial-reuse that you seek. Quote a single > sentence and be stuck with 10 single-spaced pages of the GNU Manifesto > (plus some other stuff as well). That's the license. (You could > attempt to assert a Fair Use defense in the event of such a small > quotation, however.) > > If it walks like something unfree, and quacks like something unfree, > it's probably unfree.
I agree. It is somewhat easy to sympathize with the FSF in this matter, since the invariant text happens to be a free software manifesto, but what if the invariant text were something else? Do you really want to carry around invariant sections from everyone that feels like making a statement? I can imagine that if this were anything but an FSF text, people would have an entirely different sentiment. fwiw, I support Branden's ideas on this one. -drew -- M. Drew Streib <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Free Standards Group (freestandards.org) co-founder, SourceForge.net | core team, freedb | sysadmin, Linux Intl. creator, keyanalyze report | maintnr, *.us.pgp.net | other, see freedom/law
pgpz0Dm6nlcfd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
