188 lines
7.5 KiB
HTML
188 lines
7.5 KiB
HTML
<!-- MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
|
|
<!--X-Subject: Re: License policy proposal -->
|
|
<!--X-From-R13: Rnivq Znjlre <qnirNynsa.bet> -->
|
|
<!--X-Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 02:29:32 -0400 (EDT) -->
|
|
<!--X-Message-Id: 20000910225032.A134@localhost -->
|
|
<!--X-Content-Type: text/plain -->
|
|
<!--X-Reference: 39B98AC4.28960.20125A@localhost -->
|
|
<!--X-Head-End-->
|
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML//EN">
|
|
<html>
|
|
<head>
|
|
<title>Re: License policy proposal</title>
|
|
<link rev="made" href="mailto:dave@lafn.org">
|
|
</head>
|
|
<body>
|
|
<!--X-Body-Begin-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Header-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Header-End-->
|
|
<!--X-TopPNI-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
[<a href="msg03845.html">Date Prev</a>][<a href="msg03847.html">Date Next</a>][<a href="msg03844.html">Thread Prev</a>][<a href="msg03847.html">Thread Next</a>][<a href="maillist.html#03846">Date Index</a>][<a href="threads.html#03846">Thread Index</a>]
|
|
<!--X-TopPNI-End-->
|
|
<!--X-MsgBody-->
|
|
<!--X-Subject-Header-Begin-->
|
|
<h1>Re: License policy proposal</h1>
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<!--X-Subject-Header-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Head-of-Message-->
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><em>To</em>: <A HREF="mailto:guylhemlistes@ifrance.com">guylhemlistes@ifrance.com</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>Subject</em>: Re: License policy proposal</li>
|
|
<li><em>From</em>: David Lawyer <<A HREF="mailto:dave@lafn.org">dave@lafn.org</A>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Date</em>: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 22:50:32 -0700</li>
|
|
<li><em>Cc</em>: <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>In-reply-to</em>: <<a href="msg03837.html">39B98AC4.28960.20125A@localhost</a>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Mail-followup-to</em>: guylhemlistes@ifrance.com, ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org</li>
|
|
<li><em>References</em>: <<a href="msg03837.html">39B98AC4.28960.20125A@localhost</a>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-date</em>: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 02:29:32 -0400 (EDT)</li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-from</em>: <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-message-id</em>: <6G7OzB.A.rL.twHv5@murphy></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-sender</em>: <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>User-agent</em>: Mutt/1.0pre3i</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
<!--X-Head-of-Message-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-Begin-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Body-of-Message-->
|
|
<pre>
|
|
On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 12:56:36AM +0200, guylhemlistes@ifrance.com wrote:
|
|
> Project for the new license policy of the LDP :
|
|
>
|
|
> - accept free document (i.e. released under either GFDL or OPL -A
|
|
> -B)
|
|
|
|
I don't agree with this. One problem is that neither of these
|
|
licenses prohibit advertising. Some advertising can be obnoxious,
|
|
especially if it's flashing or appears when one tries to go to the
|
|
next page of the document and instead winds up on a page of
|
|
advertising (with a link to get back to the next page of the document
|
|
you're reading). The license needs to not only prohibit advertising
|
|
in the document, but needs to also prohibit it being electronically
|
|
displayed with advertising. One might make an exception to
|
|
non-obtrusive ads for the free software movement, etc.
|
|
|
|
The GFDL allows one to lock in advertising in "invariant sections"
|
|
that may have to remain there for a hundred years or more. The GFDL
|
|
just has too many other unnecessary requirements that one must do if
|
|
one want to modify the document.
|
|
|
|
Regarding the OPL license, it also has onerous requirements for book
|
|
form publication. It requires the the original publisher's name be
|
|
printed on the book cover and be at least as large as the title. What
|
|
if there are 20 HOWTOs in the book. Are the 20 authors the
|
|
publishers, each of their own document? Or is LDP the publisher?
|
|
It's not clear. But in general I think OPL -A -B is better than GFDL
|
|
but I'm opposed to it mainly because it doesn't block advertising.
|
|
|
|
>
|
|
> - accept other document with a prominent "non free" tag section
|
|
> if
|
|
> the authors accept an agreement indicating :
|
|
> - they currently allow "non commercial redistribution"
|
|
|
|
Thus they can prohibit commercial redistribution and then sell rights
|
|
to print it to only one firm which then monopolizes the printing of
|
|
it. We've never allowed this before and shouldn't start now.
|
|
|
|
> - they do not include any advertisement at all, in any format
|
|
|
|
This needs to be in the license, otherwise someone can modify the
|
|
document by only adding advertising. Just adding advertising is a
|
|
modification isn't it.
|
|
|
|
> - they do not include more that 200 chars. of what could be
|
|
> considered as "self promotion"
|
|
> * "If you would like me to write something for you I will for a
|
|
> fee."
|
|
> -> Ok
|
|
>
|
|
> * "Come check out our GREAT technical writing capability!!! I'm
|
|
> the best"
|
|
> -> NO WAY !!!
|
|
>
|
|
> - they do allow to be re-released under either GFDL or OPL -A -
|
|
> B for maintenance/updates/enhancement reasons when the
|
|
> author(s) :
|
|
> - decides not to update it any longer
|
|
> - declare the document unmaintained
|
|
> - can not be reached any longer
|
|
> - releases a new and updated copy of the document/book
|
|
> distributed under a non commercial license
|
|
|
|
When the authors come out with an update, then may someone else
|
|
re-release the documents under GFDL? Since the authors may make an
|
|
update under whatever license they choose there would be no need to
|
|
allow the authors themselves to re-release it under GFDL.
|
|
|
|
>
|
|
> If a document goes longer than 12 months without at a
|
|
> minimum maintenance/release, it will be considered unmaintained.
|
|
>
|
|
> The obvious exception to this, is that if the document covers a
|
|
> specific software version. For example, many people still run
|
|
> Postgres 6.4.2, but 6.4.2 is over a year old.
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
So in conclusion I think we need our own license that would ban
|
|
advertising. Better yet would be to get Richard Stallman to change
|
|
his license.
|
|
David Lawyer
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
|
|
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
|
|
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<ul><li><strong>Follow-Ups</strong>:
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="03847" href="msg03847.html">Re: License policy proposal</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> Poet/Joshua Drake <poet@linuxports.com></li></ul></li>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="03849" href="msg03849.html">Re: License policy proposal</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> David Lawyer <dave@lafn.org></li></ul></li>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="03854" href="msg03854.html">Re: License policy proposal</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> jdd <jdanield@dodin.net></li></ul></li>
|
|
</ul></li></ul>
|
|
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
|
|
<!--X-References-->
|
|
<ul><li><strong>References</strong>:
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="03837" href="msg03837.html">License policy proposal</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> guylhemlistes@ifrance.com</li></ul></li>
|
|
</ul></li></ul>
|
|
<!--X-References-End-->
|
|
<!--X-BotPNI-->
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li>Prev by Date:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg03845.html">Read-rite goes Fiber Optics !!!! NEWS</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Next by Date:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg03847.html">Re: License policy proposal</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Previous by thread:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg03844.html">Re: License policy proposal</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Next by thread:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg03847.html">Re: License policy proposal</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Index(es):
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><a href="maillist.html#03846"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
|
|
<li><a href="threads.html#03846"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Footer-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
|
|
</body>
|
|
</html>
|