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.


More information about the Discussion mailing list