Fedor Zuev wrote: > There, IMHO, is a subtle difference between a creating >derivative work, and using a part of work in the completely >unrelated other work. But you, of course, may disagree. I just reply >to the words, and not try to clairvoyant a thoughts.
There may well be. It remains a useful freedom. > Heh. A very carefully crafted example. One step left or >right and you will not get your example. That's sort of the point. >When you try to apply license outside of its scope you should expect >to receive funny results. GFDL has a very narrow scope. It is bad. >But it is different problem. The GFDL may only be intended for documentation and the like, but if I want to use sections of material released under it elsewhere I'm obliged to use it. As has been pointed out, on occasion the result of this is that I can't release a combination of GFDL material under the GFDL, which means I can't release it at all. This is plainly stupid. From a pragmatic point of view, even if I could do so the combination of invarient sections I may be forced to distribute may render the result useless. It's a bad license, and it's a non-Free license. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
