Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Nowadays we have to struggle constantly against the tendency to bury > the free software movement and pretend that we advocate "open source". > So I don't think we can conclude that such precautions are no longer > necessary.
It's true that many have gladly taken GNU software while ignoring the GNU philosophy (or actively working against it). But I doubt that invariant sections alone can ensure that the message will be heard. For example, I might want to distribute the GNU Emacs manual without the GNU Manifesto. I could achieve something which is very close, even though the Manifesto is an invariant section: I just patch the Info viewers not to display the Manifesto. As far as I can see, I'm still allowed to distribute the modified Info viewer under the GPL, and the (unmodified) manual under the GFDL. However, if someone did something similar, I'd expect quite a lot of additional publicity for the GNU Manifesto. Furthermore, the publicity wouldn't depend much on the legality of the removal or suppression. Journalists who are interested in free software philosphy and its battles would report it nevertheless, and those who are after awkward legal problems have such a limited audience that their silence wouldn't matter that much.
