Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] The problem is that as things stand, Debian no longer > provides distinct handling for content and code.
Did it ever, except as a bug? Bruce Perens, the primary author of the Debian Social Contract and Debian Free Software Guidelines, stated that he "intended for the entire contents of that CD to be under the rights stated in the DFSG - be they software, documentation, or data. [...] I have very consciously maintained my own book series as Open Source rather than Creative Commons." http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/08/msg00264.html Please, do the research: show where Debian's distinct handling for content and code was in evidence. Do not make random claims. > There are a variety of > problems with the upcoming version that derive from this one problem. That's a feature not a problem: it illustrates where the gaps in free software are. There are a variety of problems that derive from the Free Software Foundation requiring a non-free-software licence in many projects. [...] > Even Richard Stallman says that aesthetic works like books and music > don't have to be free. Not in the same way and he proposes different levels of freedom for different types of books, but I think Stallman is arbitrary and inconsistant about books and music. Hope that explains, -- 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]
