> The FSF has every right to publish non-free work, but Debian should not
> bend it's rules to include it.
It is just as much a bending of rules for FSF to publish such material.
We are not bending our rules, we are following them. I designed the
GFDL to follow our criteria for free documentation.
Debian is of course free to adopt or interpret rules in a way that
yields different criteria. The DFSG are written very differently from
the Free Software Movement's criteria for free software and free
documentation, and is being interpreted by different people, so that
it would be surprising if the results were the same.
The differences may yet get bigger. I previously said that no one
here had considered claiming that the 4-clause BSD license was
non-free, because I had not seen anyone say that. Now I stand
corrected--apparently there are people who want to reject that too. I
looked at this for the GNU Project years ago, and concluded that it is
a free software license. It looks like, practically speaking, the
criteria of Debian and GNU are different.
