Re: Critique of draft GNU Free Documentation License v1.0

[Joshua Drake <poet@linuxports.com>]

Hello,

I don't see the LDP as encouraging to do either. The only requirement of
the LDP is that they are freely distributable. The documents do not have
to be modifiable, and authors if they choose, may choose the requirement
of being notified.

Please do not get me wrong, it is not that I think that what you are
suggesting is "bad" or "wrong", but I sincerely believe that "true"
freedom is the freedom to allow people to choose the constraints or lack
of constraints that they are comfortable with.

Joshua Drake

Richard Stallman wrote:
> 
>     I don't see any purpose in removing the requirement for notification
>     from the LDP suggested License. The LDP suggested License is just that a
>     suggestion, and for many works well. IMHO it should be a requirement for
>     someone to notify me if they want to modify and distribute my document.
> 
> The choice is yours, but with this requirement, I couldn't consider
> your documents as free software.  A completely free operating system
> would have to leave them out.  I hope that the LDP won't encourage
> people to do things the way you are doing it.
> 
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

-- 
<BEGIN="Signature">
<PROJECT>LinuxPorts     - http://www.linuxports.com     </PROJECT>
<WEBMASTER>LDP          - http://www.linuxdoc.org       </WEBMASTER>
</BEGIN>


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org