On Sat, May 03, 2003 at 08:31:15PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: > How is this any worse than an advertizing clause or a requirement to > make a statement in supporting documentation? We consider both of > those free.
Requiring that a piece of text be included on a cover is far more onerous than requiring a statement in the documentation. Hmm. What about this: "Both covers must also clearly and legibly identify you as the publisher of these copies. " Is requiring a distributor (of even unmodified copies) to identify himself free? It would be onerous if applied to software distribution, but I'm not sure if it's a problem here (other than the general issue of forcing me to put things on the--now very crowded--covers that I don't want to). -- Glenn Maynard
