Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal

[Poet/Joshua Drake <poet@linuxports.com>]

>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