| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
A new GPLv3 timetableA new GPLv3 timetablePosted Mar 27, 2007 18:42 UTC (Tue) by k8to (subscriber, #15413)In reply to: A new GPLv3 timetable by flewellyn Parent article: A new GPLv3 timetable
Personally I do not see why it is obviously desirable to mark the GNU Manifesto unchangable. I can copy the text today and deface it without agreeing to any portion of the GFDL under fair use for parody or whatnot. Save defacement, what changes are going to occur to the text? Removal is about the only other likely (in fact MORE likely) change. The only reason that it makes sense to make the GNU manifesto invariant and thus unremovable, is if the FSF believes that the manifesto is text that users do not want to hear. This very act creates an atmosphere of assumed desired rejection and I think is contrary to their goals.
As for invariant covers, this essentially attempts to prevent the reuse of GNU documentation in other documents, mostly likely with an eye to commercial physical-book publications. Again, I cannot see that it is desirable to discourage reuse of the GNU documentation, as it would cause the documentation to be more broadly disseminated which would encourage adoption of the GNU tools. The downside is a mere protection of an established GNU revenue stream: the printed copies of GNU manuals. Personally I am doubtful that many of the GNU manuals are purchased solely for utility reasons in a manner that would be so easily interrupted. But if this is the case, cannot the FSF seek to diversify their revenue sources, so that the documentation they create can eventually be as Free as the software it is designed to accompany?
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||