Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Debian GNU/Linux to Declare GNU GFDL non-Free?

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the read-those-licenses dept.

Syntaxis writes "There's some considerable argy-bargy in progress over whether or not GNU's own GFDL is a Free documentation license at all. At issue are "invariant sections" which cannot be removed from derivative works. Check out the thread culminating in the proposed motion to take action. The current consensus on Debian-legal does indeed appear to be that one of the FSF's own licenses is non-Free under the terms of the Debian Free Software Guidelines! Well, documentation for GPLed projects countermanding the very freedoms embodied in the GPL certainly seems insane to me."

3 of 454 comments (clear)

  1. Actually, the GPL fails the test too. by Brett+Glass · · Score: 1, Troll
    Ironically, despite the fact that it is promoted by an entity which calls itself the "Free" Software Foundation, the GPL is not "free" according to the Debian definition (and is also not "Open Source" under the Open Source Definition). Why? because it discriminates against a group of people (programmers who produce commercial software) and against a field of endeavor (the creation of commercial software). This discrimination is intentional. As Richard Stallman himself has written publicly:

    In the GNU Project, discrimination against proprietary software is not just a policy--it's the principle and the purpose.

    Most proponents of open source and freely distributable software of all kinds recognize that commercial software also has an important place in the world. But the FSF does not. Its licenses are designed to discriminate, and therefore do not conform either to the Debian defninition or the OSI definition. This isn't a matter of ideology; it's a matter of fact. Stallman himself says so.

  2. Re:You must be reading some other GPL. by Brett+Glass · · Score: 0, Troll
    It also says "Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License" and "The act of running the Program is not restricted".

    Bradley Kuhn recently announced that the FSF plans to modify the GPL so that it restricts the running of the program, or derivatives of it, for profit.

  3. Re:Talk about Zealotry by Brett+Glass · · Score: 0, Troll
    So what we have here is Debian claiming that the FSF is not radical enough in its promotion of Free Software?

    No. It's pointing out that what the FSF is advocating is not actually freedom. The FSF advocates specific licensing terms for software which are not truly free. Yes, they involve giving some things away at no cost, but their true purpose is to harm specific groups of people and fields of endeavor which Richard Stallman does not like. Stallman is zealously pursuing his "enemies," whereas Debian seeks logical consistency and ethical behavior. This is worth respecting. It's sad that Debian has so much invested in GPLed software, because the GPL does not meet Debian's own definition of "free" (as explained earlier).