FDL requirements for original author
Alfred M. Szmidt
ams at gnu.org
Fri Feb 8 22:07:44 UTC 2008
The question is: Given a dozen of simply formatted text documents,
given they'll all carry the same license, given most of them will
but a few will not come with the .tex, given the author wants
anyone to have the 4 freedoms (as conveniently as possible under
this restrictions), is it better to put "All rights reserved"
(status quo), a CC license or the FDL?
`a CC license' includes a class of non-free documentation licenses
that for example prohibit you from using them commercially, and other
nasty things. `All rights reserved' is also a non-free documentation
license as well, so the only choice is really the GNU Free
Documentation License.
One position is "if it's not ultimately free, dismiss it." (And
some count FDL as *non*free.) I rather support "make it as free as
possible. Then keep improving."
They count it as a non-free _software_ license, which it is true,
since it isn't a software license to begin with; it is a documentation
license, and a free one at that.
Cheers!
More information about the Discussion
mailing list