On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 10:50:06AM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote: > > They also told me that they don't want to allow the commercial > > distribution of the book, anyway again in their opinion this doesn't > > violate the DFSG. > > As someone who has packaged documentation before, I'm surprised that > Debian would agree with this. It's clearly non-free for software, and I > don't see what's so special about documentation to be exempt. The GNU > Free Documentation License allows it.
Not really, the key point is the following: for software DFSG allows the software to be used in a commercial environment, the same we can state for documentation i.e. you can use the documentation in a commercial environment. But does DFSG require that the documentation can be selled buy itself? Surely Gnu FDL require this, but does DFSG require the same? Quoting from the DFSG: The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research. O'Reilly editors now are not requesting that the book can't be used in a business, they are requesting that the book itself does not became _the_ business. So the quid remains. > We really need policy on on free documentation. Agreed. Cheers. -- Stefano "Zack" Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ# 33538863 Home Page: http://www.cs.unibo.it/~zacchiro Undergraduate student of Computer Science @ University of Bologna, Italy - Information wants to be Open -
pgpdY7SjfKNuS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
