[Sussex] Distros

[Steve Dobson]

Geoff

On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 07:29:04AM +0100, Geoffrey J Teale wrote:
> The case where they "cannot use" the documentation falls into two
> categories:
> 
>   1. Where someone has added an invariant section that they disagree
>      with (by implication this should not happen with the FSF's docs).
> 
>   2. Where the new project is unwilling to give credit to the original
>      authors of both the code and the documentation (which is frankly
>      contrary to the spririt of free software).
> 
> I'll freely admit that bodies other the FSF might cause problems under
> case 1.

The GFDL is a license, a contract between two parties.  If I understands
contract law (from reading Groklaw) the a contract lays out clearly what
is acceptable use by both parties.

The FSF, by continuing to include invariant sections in the current forms,
is stating that (1) is an acceptable use of their license.  I'm not saying
that they like it, just that it is acceptable.

Steve

P.S. Some of the Creative Commons licenses require that credit to the
original author(s) be given without the need for invariant sections.