"Dave Crossland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This sounds like a general endorsement that applies the Open Font > License's weak copyleft, which I hope to start a discussion about on > the OFL list shortly and look forward to your contributions there, MJ > :-)
I don't think I've ever complained about OFL's weak copyleft. It was the supertrademark clause which was the main trouble. [...] > I hope that you've engaged the FSF about all the specific drawbacks > you see in SFDL. I'm locked out of the consultations, as explained at http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.org.fsf.europe.discussion/1092 - that bug keeps recurring and it seems I cannot reopen the report. Francesco Poli has broadly similar concerns to mine, such as http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/12/msg00124.html but I've not seen any positive FSF response, only "can't do"s like http://gplv3.fsf.org/comments/rt/summarydecision.html?filename=%3C%%20%20%%3E&id=2287 How is it possible to engage the FSF these days? It seems that the only route left is causing small explosions and they're expensive to free software and probably harmful to FSFE's good work. Regards, -- MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+44-844-4437-237 - Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, consumer and workers co-operative member http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ - Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ _______________________________________________ Fsfe-uk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-uk
