Frank =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=FCster?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Well, in that sense most other software licenses cover documentation, > e.g. the GPL - that was the main point of my statement. But I see no > license that was specifically designed and worded to apply to > "documentation but not programs", as many upstream authors seem to > search.=20
That's because it's damn hard to define which is which and if you're going to be vague about it, might as well cover all software. I suspect it would be discriminating against a field of endeavour if the documentation cannot be incorporated into a program. One of my favourite quotes again: "We can't depend for the long run on distinguishing one bitstream from another in order to figure out which rules apply." -- Eben Moglen, FSF's general counsel, in Free Software and the Death of Copyright, First Monday issue 4_8. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
