[Apologies for the previous empty mail. Key hiccup.] * Anthony Towns [Sun, 01 Jan 2006 15:02:04 +1000]:
> It's been six months since the social contract changes that forbid
> non-free documentation went into effect [0], and we're still distributing
> GFDLed stuff in unstable [1]. I think we should get serious about fixing
> that, and as part of that that we should release the following statement
> (or one like it) on the GFDL:
I propose an amendment to this GR, consisting in replacing the
existing text with the one below. I initially tried to follow
Anthony's original text as close as possible, and just add a paragraph
and reword a couple sentences, but I didn't quite like the result, so
I ended up rewriting it; if somebody manages to fit point (2) below in
the original text, be my guest. The section "Problems of the GFDL"
comes straight away from Manoj's Draft Position Statement [1].
[1] http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.html
As I expect that at least one of the seconds/proposer will object to
this amendment (heh), I'm actively looking for seconds myself now.
Thanks.
-----------------------------------8<-----------------------------------
Debian and the GNU Free Documentation License
=============================================
This is the position of Debian Project about the GNU Free Documentation
License as published by the Free Software Foundation:
1. We consider that the GNU Free Documentation License version 1.2
conflicts with traditional requirements for free software in a
variety of ways, explained in detail in the "Problems of the GFDL"
section below.
The most grave of these problems are the so-called "invariant
sections", which are non-removable, non-modifiable parts of the
document that the GFDL allows in works under this license. However,
modifiability is a fundamental requirement of the Debian Free
Software Guidelines, so this restriction is not acceptable for us.
2. We believe that works licensed under the GFDL that include no such
unmodifiable sections do fully meet the spirit of the Debian Free
Software Guidelines, and have a place in our distribution despite
the other problems (minor, in comparison) that the GFDL has.
Formally, the Debian Project will include in the main section of
its distribution works licensed under the GNU Free Documentation
License that include no Invariant Sections, no Cover Texts, no
Acknowledgements, and no Dedications, unless permission to remove
them is granted.
3. Despite the compromise above, GFDL'd documentation is still not
free of trouble: as an example, it is incompatible with the major
free software licenses, which means that GFDL'd text can't be
incorporated into free programs.
For this reason, we encourage documentation authors to license
their works (or dual-license, together with the GFDL) under a well
known free software license like the the GPL or the BSD license.
Problems of the GFDL
--------------------
I. The DRM Restriction
Section 2 (Verbatim Copying) of the GFDL goes beyond the traditional
source requirement in copyleft licenses in an important way: according
to the GFDL no copy may ever be subject to "technical measures to
obstruct or control" reading and copying. This means that:
(a) It is not limited to the act of distribution (i.e., it applies
to private copies as well).
(b) It rules out the possibility that a version be distributed on
some form of DRM media (for technical reasons, perhaps), even
while providing source (i.e., a transparent copy) in an
unencumbered way at the same time.
(c) As written, it would outlaw actions like changing the permission
of a copy of the document on your machine, storing it on an
encrypted file system, distributing a copy over an encrypted
link (Obstruct or control the reading is not clarified to apply
merely to the recipient), or even storing it on a file-sharing
system with non-world-readable permissions.
Consider that the GFDL currently prohibits distribution on DRM media,
as compared to the GPL which requires distribution on non-DRM media.
This is a serious additional restriction.
II. Transparent And Opaque Copies
Section 3 (Copying in Quantity) of the GFDL states that it is not
enough to just put a transparent copy of a document alongside with the
opaque version when you are distributing it (which is all that you
need to do for sources under the GPL, for example). Instead, the GFDL
insists that you must somehow include a machine-readable Transparent
copy (i.e., not allow the opaque form to be downloaded without the
transparent form) or keep the transparent form available for download
at a publicly accessible location for one year after the last
distribution of the opaque form.
It is our belief that as long as you make the source and binaries
available so that the users can see what's available and take what
they want, you have done what is required of you. It is up to the user
whether to download the transparent form.
The requirements for redistributors should be to make sure the users
can get the transparent form, not to force users to download the
transparent form even if they don't want it.
III. Invariant Sections
This is the most troublesome part of the GFDL.
The GNU FDL includes a number of conditions that apply to all
modified versions that disallow modifications. Specifically, Section
4 of the GFDL describes the invariant sections that must be unaltered
in their text and in their titles in any derived works. These
invariant sections must be secondary sections; a secondary section
is a named appendix or a front-matter section of the Document that
deals exclusively with the relationship of the publishers or authors
of the Document to the Document's overall subject (or to related
matters) and contains nothing that could fall directly within that
overall subject. These parts include:
* Invariant Sections
* Cover Texts
* Acknowledgements
* Dedications
However, modifiability is a fundamental requirement of the Debian Free
Software Guidelines, which state:
3. Derived Works
The license must allow modifications and derived works, and
must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the
license of the original software.
As such, we cannot accept works that include "Invariant Sections" and
similar unmodifiable components into our distribution.
----------------------------------->8-----------------------------------
--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org
- Oh, George, you didn't jump into the river. How sensible of you!
-- Mrs Banks in «Mary Poppins»
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
