Hi, On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 12:03:22PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 12:17:50PM +0200, Martin Quinson wrote: > > Answer 1: Nobody asked the right to change the content of the file > > RFC23423.txt and distribute it as is. This would clearly be wrong and > > it would be ok to ask for a file rename, for a clear notice changes > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Ask, yes. Require in the license, no. This was established during the > LPPL dissection. > > Contrived example: I have an application that uses rfc23423.txt as > input data (reading a table or something), and it is prohibitively > difficult to change the filename it looks for. Contrived, indeed. Especially since we should not create our criteria for documentation and standards licenses to especially accomodate non-free software that cannot be modified to accept a different file name. Also, the clause is about appropriately identifying a file as such when distributing a modified copy. No perverse combination of law and license should be able prevent you from installing it on your own system under a file name of your choice. Cheers, Emile. -- E-Advies - Emile van Bergen [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel. +31 (0)70 3906153 http://www.e-advies.nl