The GFDL allows for certain parts to have a "you can't edit this".. For instance the author's name, cover art and bibliographic information...
This is NOT a required part of the license... For instance, the gNewSense website itself uses GFDL with NO invariant sections. I say that pretty clearly established at least HALF of the issue. GFDL with no invariant is certainly a Free License. Debian believes that the GFDL WITH invariant is non-free because it can't be modified; I'd also agree with one exception... If the invariant part is the author's name, I consider that still Free - after all you can't modify the text of the GPL itself or the copyright notice. On 9/1/07, Paul O'Malley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tryggvi Björgvinsson wrote: > > > > But, if I understand you correctly, the "no invariant" makes the license > > free. How come the packages are named for example automake1.9-nonfree. > I imagine this is a debianism > to check this out why not download the packages you want > > apt-cache policy packagename > > this tells you where it is from and what its name is > > then make a directory > > lets say: > > /home/user/Desktop/test-packagename > > then in a terminal on desktop > > dpkg -x test-packagename/. > cd test-packagename > > wander about it all and check licences and see what hops out > > I imagine it is naming based on GFDL and there is nothing we can do > about that without serious hackage on lots of packages. > > > > > Trying to figure it out by myself the "no invariant" makes it possible > > to change the contents (freedom 3). > correct > P. > > > > _______________________________________________ > gNewSense-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-users >
_______________________________________________ gNewSense-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-users
