[This should be probably have been an off-list reply, but I feel the need to clarify the issue to all readers. Sorry for the noise.] >>>>> fant == Frank Küster [2006-10-2]
fant> As for the first issue, one particularly problematic point is the fant> overly broad anti-DRM clause. FSF representatives have said that fant> they would not try to sue anybody for, for example, including a fant> filesystem with a GFDL'ed manual on it in a backup that gets fant> protected by a password. In this specific example, it is my understanding that if you do not further distribute your filesystem, there is nothing that a _license_ can do to prevent you from including a GFDL'ed manual on a (private) password protected backup. Maybe some gnus or gnats will get after you and knock your hands, but they won't surely do it legally and backed up by the license. OTH, I do not really understand how would it be useful to distribute such a think without the means to decrypt the manual. -- Ciao, Davide _______________________________________________ auctex-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
