EU Copyright..

Tomasz Wegrzanowski taw at
Sat May 4 22:41:48 UTC 2002

On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 12:40:40AM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 11:33:46PM +0200, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> > No, it's not.
> > DFSG is perfect, it's GFDL what is flawed.
> No, the first flaw of the DFSG is that it only goes about software and
> not about documentation.

There was always lot of documentation in Debian.
If FSF didn't introduce completely broken GFDL,
it would all be alright.

> > GFDL with "invariant sections" or some "front/back cover" things is
> > proprietary license.
> It isn't, it only takes away freedoms you can't do anything useful

Not having to publish crap is something very useful.

> with and is generally only abused. The same does the GPL.

Have you ever worked with open/free documentation ?

It would completely destroy Wikipedia if we allowed some 'invariant

More information about the Discussion mailing list