On Sat, 2006-02-04 at 14:06 +0000, Joachim Noreiko wrote: > --- Simos Xenitellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Care to back this up? (URL?) > > http://live.gnome.org/DocumentationProject_2fTasks > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-doc-list/2005-October/msg00014.html > > Though surely this title business is a > misinterpretation of the license? Otherwise it's plain > nuts.
I would guess that it was a misinterpretation, as http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-doc-list/2005-October/msg00014.html talks of "derivative documents". However the GFDL talks about changing the title for "modified versions"... Therefore it would seem that the title must be changed... I would think that adding a version number at the end of the title would not legally be considered changing the title, but rather keeping the same title with an appended number. I think we may as well shed the version number, as I don't think adding this exposes us any less to legal threats. That said, the current user-guide does not seem to respect a few other things that the GDFL imposes : * List authors on title page * "State on the Title page the name of the publisher" * Add a copyright notice for modifications * The legal notice (GDFL license text or reference) does not seem to be user visible (GNOME 2.12) I would agree that the GFDL is just not meant for the task we are using it for. Love, Karderio _______________________________________________ gnome-doc-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
