[ox-en] Re: GFDL
- From: Stefan Merten <smerten oekonux.de>
- Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2003 12:01:03 +0100
Hi all!
Last week (7 days ago) Benja Fallenstein wrote:
No, they may. From section 4, "Modifications:"
You may add a passage of up to five words as a Front-Cover Text, and a
passage of up to 25 words as a Back-Cover Text, to the end of the list
of Cover Texts in the Modified Version. Only one passage of
Front-Cover Text and one of Back-Cover Text may be added by (or
through arrangements made by) any one entity. If the Document already
includes a cover text for the same cover, previously added by you or
by arrangement made by the same entity you are acting on behalf of,
you may not add another; but you may replace the old one, on explicit
permission from the previous publisher that added the old one.
There is no restriction on this if there wasn't a cover text before. I
haven't checked for invariant sections, but I believe strongly that the
same pattern holds there.
If I understand correctly, the FSF does not consider texts with
invariant sections and/or cover texts non-free-- rather they see them as
legitimate tools for gaining recognition for one's work, and they hope
that front-/back-cover texts will make publishers more willing to fund
and publish Free documentation. They do of course want to give everyone
the ability to merge arbitrary FDLed documents-- that alone necessiates
the ability to add invariant sections and cover texts to an existing
document (the merged document will have both original documents' cover
text and invariant sections).
I do see the logic in it; I'm not impressed by them allowing either
option in the first place, though.
I think the new version made rather clear what is meant here. The key
paragraphs here are
The "Invariant Sections" are certain Secondary Sections whose titles
are designated, as being those of Invariant Sections, in the notice
that says that the Document is released under this License. *If a
section does not fit the above definition of Secondary then it is
not allowed to be designated as Invariant.* [highlighting by me] The
Document may contain zero Invariant Sections. If the Document does
not identify any Invariant Sections then there are none.
and
A "Secondary Section" is a named appendix or a front-matter section
of the Document that deals exclusively with the relationship of the
publishers or authors of the Document to the Document's overall
subject (or to related matters) and contains nothing that could fall
directly within that overall subject. *(Thus, if the Document is in
part a textbook of mathematics, a Secondary Section may not explain
any mathematics.)* [highlighting by me] The relationship could be a
matter of historical connection with the subject or with related
matters, or of legal, commercial, philosophical, ethical or
political position regarding them.
So the worries of Thomas that someone may add invariant racist stuff
or things like that is not covered by the GFDL. The logic Benja sees
is regulated with substantiated rules and I see absolutely no problem
with this.
6 days ago MJ Ray wrote:
Me neither. I normally suggest using plain GPL or the DSL for copyleft
books. http://www.dsl.org/copyleft/dsl.txt
How about explaining the differences instead of dumping just another
link?
Can anyone see a problem with that?
If you had made the effort to check the differences you would have
noted that there are little. IMHO the GFDL is only a more elaborate
version of this license. Particularly the logic mentioned above is
included in that license as well under "4. MODIFICATION":
(c) Appropriate authorship credit is given: for the differences
between the Work and the new derivative work, authorship is
attributed to you, while the material sampled or used from the Work
remains attributed to the original Author; appropriate notice must
be included with the new work indicating the nature and the dates of
any modifications of the Work made by you.
Mit Freien Grüßen
Stefan
_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/