On 26 Jan 1999, Henning Makholm wrote: > Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > IMHO, the restrictions below do not prevent us distributing on CD, and > > I believe that we already have docs in main with licenses as harsh as > > this. > > E.g. the GPL itself, as a document, is under copyright conditions that > would definitely make it non DFSG-free had it happened to be a source > code. > > > > 02. Any translation or derivative work of The Linux Net- > > > work Administrators' Guide must be approved by the au- > > > thor in writing before distribution. > > > This is awful. > > I don't think that clause has any legal significance compared to if > it wasn't present. If distribution of derived work is not *explicitly* > allowed, it is forbidden. > > Would you require that any documentation on the CDs should come with > copyright statemtents that explicitly allowed modification?
In an ideal world, I would, yes. I believe that all the arguments levelled at free software apply to technical documentation. I believe that many of them apply to many other works which are not documentation. However, this is not (explicitly) debian policy at the moment. I will bring up the argument on -policy again soon, when I have the energy. If anyone else wants to, go for it.. Jules /----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\ | Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd | | Jules aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Richmond, Surrey | | Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TW9 2TF *UK* | +----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+ | War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. | | When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. | \----------------------------------------------------------------------/
