Milan Zamazal wrote: > Thank you all for your answers, I think I can get the point now. I'll add a couple more clarifications. :-)
<snip> >>>>>> "HM" == Humberto Massa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: <snip> > HM> I made a copy. It's not my copyright, is other person. If I do > HM> "chmod -r", it's a technical measure that obstructs others from > HM> further copying my copy. > > I think it's not your copyright, but it's still your copy. So > `chmod -r' is IMHO just stopping distribution of the copy. Which is precisely what is prohibited. :-P >From the GFDL: "You may not use technical measures to obstruct or control the reading or further copying of the copies you make or distribute." <snip> > Here is the point. If the document was distributed *only* on a CSS > medium, it might violate copyleft principles. But it should be allowed, > for example, to distribute the document on such a medium, if it is > accompanied with a freely readable medium. GFDL is unclear here and > that's the problem. Actually, the GFDL is quite clear: you aren't allowed distribute on an encypted medium even if it's accompanied by a freely readable medium -- you can't even *make* a copy on an encrypted medium, according to the line I quoted above. Yes, this is the problem. -- There are none so blind as those who will not see.
