Emmanuel Colbus wrote: > My main concern about this was that such relicensed copies > could have been considered not free, but undistributable, as the GPL is supposed to apply to > software, not to documents.
Any collection of bits is "software". The GPL works very well for any collection of bits. Some people think that it, particularly the requirement for provision of source code and the nature of permission to distribute in forms other than source code, may have problems when applied to dead-tree printed material. This is easily dealt with by dual-licensing under the GPL and a printing-friendly license of your choice. -- Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This space intentionally left blank. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
