On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 11:59:21AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > I disagree with this position. See Fabian Fagerholm's explanation. > For a strong copyleft licence like the GPL it's particularly > troublesome if people go around making minor edits: all of that code > is licence-incompatible with all unedited-GPL code. So the FSF have > worked to prevent that by using the copyright on their licence text > and I don't think that's unreasonable.
Actually, that's not what's going on. The FSF clearly state that you may make edits to the GPL, but that you must then * remove the preamble * rename the license to something else (it must not be "GNU General Public License" anymore, then) While I have no issue with either and agree with your conclusion anyway, it's not the same thing as "using copyright on the license to prevent incompatible changes" -- <Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes. -- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
