[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal
- To: Guylhem Aznar <>
- Subject: Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal
- From: Poet/Joshua Drake <>
- Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 19:18:50 -0700 (PDT)
- cc: Poet/Joshua Drake <>, Richard Stallman <>, , ,
-
In-Reply-To: <20000723212851.B1435@guylhem.eyep.net>
- Resent-Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 23:22:19 -0400 (EDT)
- Resent-From:
- Resent-Message-ID: <tv0dVC.A.PUC.Va7e5@murphy>
- Resent-Sender:
>Yet there is a restriction on commercial reprint.
>Harmless for the LDP; but not free. We shouldn't restrain people from
>making money with free software !
It is not free software. It is documentation. We should not hinder the
ability for an author to make money from "free" documentation.
I really don't want to get into a what "free" really means debate. I do
feel strongly that we should give the authors the ability to
choose their own licenses.
If they want to set it up so that a publisher can not re-print without
permission and or compensation, more power to them. If they want to place
it under the GFDL, more power to them.
J
>
>(BTW read your excellent resonse to kuro5hin article; I agree at 80% :-)
>
>
--
--
<COMPANY>CommandPrompt - http://www.commandprompt.com </COMPANY>
<PROJECT>OpenDocs, LLC. - http://www.opendocs.org </PROJECT>
<PROJECT>LinuxPorts - http://www.linuxports.com </PROJECT>
<WEBMASTER>LDP - http://www.linuxdoc.org </WEBMASTER>
--
Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.
--
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org