It looks like Debian wants to use the GPL for documentation. I don't think that the GPL is appropriate for written text. Written text is different.
For example, suppose you write a letter discussing a political or moral issue you feel strongly about (racism, abortion, etc). Suppose someone makes a "derivative" of your work, making it look like you are promoting the exact opposite position. Wouldn't that be wrong? If you use the GPL, they could argue that you gave them permission to do this (and you did). The issue of attribution plays a unique role in written text. That's why all the major licenses for written text try to deal with it in some way. For example, the PDL requires you to keep track of who changed what. I think that the CC attribution license is an excellent choice for written text, and that it provides more freedom than the PDL. Just my $0.02 Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org |
