Re: [O] GFDL

[Ben Finney]

On 27-May-2013, Bastien wrote:
> Ben Finney <address@hidden> writes:
> > Do you have a reference from some FSF official for that restriction?
> 
> See this discussion:
>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2012-12/msg00375.html

Thanks very much for that information.

I had not realised how obstructionist RMS has become on this issue,
blocking attempts event to dual-license a document under at least one free
license (the FDL is not a free license by the FSF's own definition), and
insisting that Debian change its social contract to allow non-free works.

Given that entrenched position, the only hope for new freely-licensed FSF
documentation now seems to be for RMS's authority to be over-ruled on this
from within FSF, which could take some time.

It's good to have this to refer back to, so I'm grateful for this
discussion.

-- 
 \      “Software patents provide one more means of controlling access |
  `\      to information. They are the tool of choice for the internet |
_o__)                                     highwayman.” —Anthony Taylor |
Ben Finney <address@hidden>

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature