Em Qui, 2006-02-02 às 18:49 +0000, Stephen Gran escreveu: > This one time, at band camp, Daniel Ruoso said: > > > So, if I were to write a program, which at startup displays the > > > entiretity of the GNU Manifesto, and wrote a license, which would be > > > GPL with the addition that the startup display may not be modified, > > > only amended, you would consider this program a DFSG program and it > > > could go into main? > > IMHO, it's non-free. It's completely reasonable to want to remove the > > startup display at all... > Except that the GPL already explicitly precludes modifications of this > type (not this scope, but this type, mind you), and our foundation > documents consider the GPL a free license.
GPL is very clear about that: "to print or display an announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this License." The GNU Manifesto is *not* an copyright notice, and you're not required to display the entire license, only that it is licensed under the GPL and where to get it. So, I would not violate the license if I (even not as the copyright owner) modify the way this is displayed and the text displayed, as long as I keep: 1) The copyright notice: "Copyright(c) 2006 Whoever ([EMAIL PROTECTED])" 2) The "No Warrant" notice: which can have the text changed. 3) Legal: "This is a GPL software. You can get a copy of the lincence at http//wherever.com" I'm not forced to display this the same way the original author did, and not even the same text. I.e.: If the original author popped up a dialog box with a OK button, I still can show this information in the splash screen without any user confirmation... This has nothing to do with invariant sections. daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
