Bob Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > 1) The GNU FDL does not satisfy the DFSG even if there are no Invariant > > Sections or Cover Texts. > > A few minutes earlier Branden Robinson wrote: > > > > Why not to use the GNU FDL: > > > http://home.twcny.rr.com/nerode/neroden/fdl.html > > > > Wow. Most Apropos Sig Ever. :) > > > > I like that document. Everyone concerned about the GNU FDL issue should > > read it. > > The referenced above, says, in part, > > | If you use the GFDL but don't use Invariant Sections or Cover Texts, > | and don't include an "Acknowledgements" or "Dedications" section, this > | is free. But a later person, modifying your work, can still add > | them. Accordingly, the GFDL fails to be a "copyleft": later authors > | can convert your free manual into a manual encumbered with Invariant > | Sections. > > Will the real Branden please stand up?
There are also problems with the definition of Opaque and Transparent Forms which, IMHO, render it non-free no matter what you put in it. So I would disagree with the referenced link in that respect. Regards, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
