Message 01049 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT00735 Message: 24/79 L10 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [ox-en] Copyleft on Everything?

Graham Seaman <graham> wrote:
the simplest one I could see, and where I knew I had rms's seal of
approval (I don't actually think he's hypocritical in this, as you
suggested before).  [...]

I know you may be worried that I'll sue you for copying my words, but
there's no need to misquote me.  I said arbitrary and illogical, not
hypocritical: he definitely follows his own opinion on the licence of
opinion-based articles.

But I couldn't do either of the above because of the conference 

Both relying on "fair use rights" and "public domain" will fail in
certain jurisdictions.  Sadly, it's a real problem that has to be
dealt with, unless you take the "intellectual property law is all
mind-theft regulation" stance.

I do think the gfdl or similar licenses are entirely appropriate for
technical manuals, which is what it was intended for. If you do use the

Again, I find it arbitrary.  Why can you only edit parts of the GFDL
work that relate to the main purpose?  You can't even remove BloggsCo's
advertorial about how the product helped them, or the author's "Ode to
my Goldfish".

This all seems WAY too serious to me for a little web article hardly

Blame the lawyers.  They started it.  /me runs.

But yes, more hacking, less chinning.

MJR   IM: slef
      This is my home web site.   This for Jabber Messaging.

How's my writing? Let me know via any of my contact details.


Thread: oxenT00735 Message: 24/79 L10 [In index]
Message 01049 [Homepage] [Navigation]