Re: [gNewSense-users] Debian User. Is there a need to move to gNS?

[Dave Crossland]

On 12/02/07, MJ Ray <address@hidden> wrote:
> gNS will contain FDL'd adware manuals which are not free software

I expect we are all familiar with the Debian FDL controversy.

I hope we are all also familiar with the Debian CC controversy, and
that all those licenses must also be ruled out, outright.

Given that, we've run out of popular Free Culture licenses.

Oh dear.

Except, in fact, the GNU FDL is a DFSG approved license as long as one
includes the "with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no
Back-Cover Texts" line in the copyright notice. This is what the
Wikimedia Foundation do, for example.

You might still object to using it because someone might include an
Invariant Section or Front-Cover Text on their forked version
("adware" indeed) but IMO since that won't be taken into the trunk,
that fork is likely to die off.

However, the FSF has recognised this situation is undesirable, and the
forthcoming GNU Simpler Free Documentation License will close this
adware loophole for good; such DFSG-FDL works will be able to be ported
to the SFDL via Section 8 of Draft 1 for Version 2, at
http://gplv3.fsf.org/comments/gfdl-draft-1.html

Therefore I am quite happy to use the FDL at the moment; the
alternative is Creative Commons :-(

--
Regards,
Dave