On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 02:36:28PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote: > 3. I placed my book under this license with the express understanding > that it was considered free. Now I'm hearing noise that this is a > non-free license. While I disagree, that is often irrelevant. > > 4. If we still have no free documentation license. I'm not sure how we > can make demands for "good" documentation.
As usual, this issue has been beaten to death on a list you don't read. Please review the archives of debian-legal for the past several months. In a nutshell: 1) The current version of the GNU FDL is uncontroversially DFSG-free if there are no Cover Texts and no Invariant Sections. Note that your license notice is supposed to indicate the presence or absence of Cover Texts and Invariant Sections. 2) The Open Publication License (OPL), is also uncontroversially DFSG-free when none of the "license options" are exercised. Read the archives of debian-legal for supporting references. -- G. Branden Robinson | One man's theology is another man's Debian GNU/Linux | belly laugh. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Robert Heinlein http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
pgpD6SM16B1ml.pgp
Description: PGP signature
