Op Thu, 4 Apr 2013 22:45:12 GMT schreef k...@freefriends.org (Karl Berry): > To my knowledge, it has always been the analysis that RFC's and > similar (C standards, POSIX standards, W3C standards, just about any > kind of official standard) are not ok for free distros. Because they > are "information for practical use" (term from > http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html) > but they do not typically allow modification, just verbatim > redistribution.
I interpret that license for the text the same way. > Which leaves many free software packages (not just distros) in the > position of implementing standards which they are not allowed to > distribute. Bizarre and unwelcome IMHO, but that seems to be the > consequence. I remember from looking at the SHA-1 bug [1] that at least the code in recent RFC's is often permissively licensed, so at least we have that. [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=643703
