Adam McKenna wrote:
The exact text of the FDL is:
"You may not use technical measures to obstruct or control the reading or
further copying of the copies you make or distribute."
For the purposes of this clause, there are two kinds of copies that can
be made.
1) Copies that are made, but not distributed
2) Copies that are made and distributed
In case #1, the only person who has access to the copies is the person who
made them. Assuming he hasn't employed a technical measure to prevent
himself from reading or making further copies, he complies with the license.
If I use rcp to copy a work from one machine to another (both which are
owned an exclusively used by me), this is making a copy but not
distributing.
Now, if I were to do that from my local wireless hotspot, anyone else on
the hotspot has access to that copy while it is being transmitted. I'd
like to keep the document private, so instead I use scp. But wait —
encryption is a "technological measure to obstruct ... the reading or
further copying of the copies [I] make." The people I am restricting
from reading or further copying are my fellow wireless hotspot users.
It seems you have read the GFDL to say:
"You may not use technical measures to obstruct or control the
reading or further copying of the copies you make or distribute BY
THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S)."
but that's not what it says, unfortunately. And if that is what it is
intended to say, then why doesn't it? Its not like we didn't point this
out to the FSF during the draft period. In addition, this effectively
strikes the words "make or" leaving:
You may not use technical measures to obstruct or control the
reading or further copying of the copies you distribute
but surely interpretation which requires ignoring words should not be
preferred?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
