Hi Ron, On Sat, Nov 18, 2006 at 01:54:42PM +1030, Ron wrote: > What is not obvious to me, is that the "invariant section" here (in at > least the case I quoted) does anything of that sort at all. In this > case it just seems to make explicit something which has always been > the case, and which wouldn't change without that invariant section: > namely that you can't modify the GPL text included with, and referred > to by, that source.
> So if the invariant section is a no-op, I don't really see how it can > affect the status of this source being Free or not. I agree with the > basic premise of the GR, but this seems to be a corner case where its > intention would not seem to actually apply. It's not a no-op. The GPL is *not* the license *of the manual*; one should have the right to create derived works from the manual without having to distribute the text of the license *for the program*. > Ultimately, it is going to boil down to a line call from the RM's as to > whether they think this source is suitable to include in the release > as is, This call has been made for some time. GFDL manuals with invariant sections and/or cover texts are not suitable for main in etch. > > License texts are a special case, really. Please don't try to pull the > > debate > > in that direction; it's not particularily productive. :-) > The former was precisely my intended point there. I didn't raise it to > try to open a new can of worms and distract from resolving this, rather > to recognise that if we accept licences are a special case [1], then I > don't really see how that changes if explicit mention is made of them > being invariant. License texts *as licenses* are a special case. License texts *as content*, which is the case for a GFDL manual shipping a copy of the GPL for no reason relating to the existing legal requirements, are not. (In this specific case, including the GPL in the manual because you're documenting the license terms of the program would probably be ok, but yes, it should be possible to remove the GPL text from the manual if one chooses. Making the text of the GPL an Invariant Section under the GFDL eliminates that option. (BTW, you realize that by marking it an "Invariant Section", even if the work is distributed under "GPLv2 or later" and you as a redistributor opt for a later version of the license, only upstream is allowed to update the GPL text in the manual?) Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
