FDL again, was: My concerns about GPLv3 process

Frank Heckenbach frank at g-n-u.de
Thu Feb 23 21:04:06 UTC 2006

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:

> On Thu, 2006-02-23 at 00:01 +0100, Eneko Lacunza wrote:
> > 	You also don't comment my first paragraph about the problems with
> > invariant/dedications.
> Dedications can't be Invariants.

Because you say so? According to the FDL, dedications can certainly
be secondary sections and thus invariant sections.

In case you mean FDL 4.K and the last paragraphs of 5. and 9., these
clauses refer only to sections entitled ["Acknowledgments" or]
"Dedications", not to any section containing dedications, but
entitled differently. (BTW, the conditions for those are not that
much different from invariant sections, but that's irrelevant to the
point here.)

> > 	I respect you to not want the text you've written be modified, no
> > matter the contents, but then it is NOT FREE.
> Passing yourself for me is not allowed by law.

Which is exactly why you don't need the license to try to enforce
this (in a cumbersome way). It is already forbidden by law!
Diffamation laws don't depend on copyright licenses.


Frank Heckenbach, frank at g-n-u.de
GnuPG and PGP keys: http://fjf.gnu.de/plan (7977168E)

More information about the Discussion mailing list