Re: [ox-en] UserLinux
- From: "Benj. Mako Hill" <mako debian.org>
- Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 15:13:16 +0100
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 07:22:21AM -0500, Graham Seaman wrote:
Sorry, that comment wasn't meant as any deep criticism - I just
thought it was mildly funny, that's all.
I didn't see it that way but wanted to try and give Bruce bit of the
benefit of the doubt since he's been active -- but not highly visible
-- in this area in the past. :)
And sure, it is funny. *Especially* in light of all the good work Bruce
has done in terms of free documentation.
Many of the biggest FOSS advocates (like RMS) don't seem to think that
the documentation for software should be free in the same way or to
the same degree that software is. While others may think DFSG
non-compliant documentation is ridiculous, they think that locking
down other types of non-technical literature as perfectly sensible.
If you've looked at the huge threads on debian-legal about
documentation, you'll see the sort of deep divisions there are within
the FOSS community that this debate has triggered. You can get mostly
everyone to agree that free and verbatim copying, reproduction, and
distribution is essential. Where you run into problems is in dealing
with things like the question of modifiability of political texts and
but when you start talking about "art." You start seeing all sorts of
things like discussions of authors rights that usually aren't part of
a FOSS license discussion.
This is new, very interesting, and very rich terrain. :)
Regards,
Mako
--
Benjamin Mako Hill
mako debian.org
http://mako.yukidoke.org/