I'm astounded. You want writers to assign copyright on GTK+ documentation to a commercial organisation (Red Hat) ? It will eventually be owned by IBM and any intellectual property rights will be transferred. IBM is not as benign.
What about all of the other documentation projects that offer variations of the GPL ? DDP, LDP, OPL all serve to protect the users rights. Users are free to make copies. The producer does no work for the extra copy so should need no payment; this applies to documentation as well as software. I'm a writer, I would never assign copyright to a commercial organisation unless they pay me. To suggest I should work on FSF based documentation, assign the copyright and not get paid for it is laughable. You're wrong and should change this policy immediately.
