0) Is this section intended to be free-form text that can contain anything, or specifically a list of names and contact information? Can we somehow disallow a 200-page useful endorsement with a 10-line useless body? Or should this simply be judgement that we apply on a per-package basis?
Also, is there a more general term to use than "endorsements"? I've been known to write things I don't actually endorse, but still want my authorship known. I'd prefer "attributions" or "contributors". On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Branden Robinson wrote: > 1) Endorsements would go along with the copyright notice itself, not the > license text. This is so that they are somewhat prominent. I'd prefer not to have varying-length text be an unchangeable part of the document. Could we instead require specific text in the copyright statement that refers to the license text that may include attributions? > 2) Distributors are NOT compelled to *retain* endorsements in the copies > of the document they distribute. If they want to trim the endorsement > list, even to zero, for purposes of space, personal feud, or whatever, > they may. This seems workable. I presume the endorsement is all-or-nothing; a distributor cannot trim endorsements to non-zero without specific extra-license permission. Nor correct typos, etc. > 3) Endorsements *must* be removed when a document is modified in any > way. Endorsers may wish to communicate to the world (via a Web Page), > blanket permission to retain their endorsement under certain > circumstances (e.g. "any typographical corrections" or "as long as the > chapter entitled Funding Free Software is retained in its original > form"). I like the idea, but it may be difficult to execute. Who must provide such permission? Every endorser? Every distributor up the chain? We should at the very least provide boilerplate for the additional permission that specifies that a document modified under the special exemption may itself be distributed under the DFCL with or without the special permission. > 4) Anyone, not just the copyright holder of the document in question, > can sign on as an endorser to a version of any DFCL-licensed document. > Whether their endorsement is listed is up to the distributor (see 2 > above). I would hope that I am not allowed to, without special permission, add names to the endorsement list without removing the existing endorsement list? May I distribute documents endorsed by "The Band of Three", Benito Mussolini, Josef Stalin, and Branden Robinson? [ note clever avoidance of Godwin's Law.] Actually, I guess I should be disallowed from adding anyone to the endorsement list without their permission. Can the license prevent me from adding a name to the endorsemements that I just removed to comply with #3? > 5) Removing that text will not be permitted, unfortunately (yes, this is > invariant text). I'd prefer this be in the license document rather than in the text itself, but it's not a showstopper IMO. As long as the invariant text is 1) very short and 2) not a creative work in itself. > We *could* require that an edition with no endorsements have an > alternative notice that says so with scary language, but that introduces > complexity and I'd rather not go that road. Are you willing to go down that road if we change "require" to "allow"? If all attributions are removed, we could allow a very short notice like "This version has been modified, and may not faithfully represent the original work." Or the distributor could keep the original longer invariant, whichever she prefers. This shorter notice also makes clearer that a work can express a point of view which may be different than that of the "endorsers". -- Mark Rafn [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.dagon.net/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
