Hi! >>>>> Ben Gertzfield writes:
BG> On slashdot.org today, an article about the OpenContent License BG> (OPL, pronounced 'opal') was posted. OPL is nice because it is designed to be easy-to-understand. However, keep in mind that there are a number of people (myself included) who are using GPL for our documentation. The rationale is given at the following site: http://www.dsl.org/copyleft/ Essentially, there are some clauses of the GPL which apply only to programs, but the GPL states that if any clause is invalidated, then it has no bearing on the requirements of the rest of the license. This means that the GPL is effectively the same license as OPL when applied to documentation. There are, however, two fundamental differences: 1) If you write GPLed software that incorporates OPLed information, then the software as a whole will have two licenses. This is unlike the LGPL, which allows people to relicense a work under the GPL if they choose (since the GPL is stricter). I would like the OPL to contain a clause which allows this kind of relicensing under GPL. 2) The OPL says nothing about ``source code,'' which is a very useful thing for documentation. If I get a PCL file without the Texinfo or SGML sources, that information is just as hard to use as if I got a program binary without its source code. OPL makes no provision for requiring the distribution of ``the preferred form of modification for a work,'' but the GPL does. I've said these things to the person behind opencontent.org, but I have not gotten any reply from him yet. So, my opinion is that even though OPL is fine, we don't really need another license. GPL works fine as a copyleft for all information that is protected by copyright law. See Michael Stutz's essay (above URL) for more details, as his argument is quite well-constructed. -- Gordon Matzigkeit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> //\ I'm a FIG (http://www.fig.org/) Lovers of freedom, unite! \// I use GNU (http://www.gnu.org/) Copyright (C) 1998 FIG.org; the creator offers you this gift and wants it to remain free. See http://www.fig.org/freedom.html for details. This work may be copied, modified and distributed under the GNU General Public License (GPL). See http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html.
