The idea of writing a single license for both software and documentation (i.e., for "content") is a good one. Perhaps this could be done in GPL version 4. I would hope that in extending it, the beauty of the current GPL is preserved.
What is beautiful about the GPL is that it grants the licensee total freedom to do what s/he likes with the work, with a single well understood limitation: s/he cannot distribute an improved version of the work under more restrictive terms or conditions than those of the GPL. This restriction is not a burdensome restriction on anyone who wants to contribute to the commons: it simply rules out a certain dangerous sort of exploitative behavior: the Embrace and Extend(tm) strategy. The GPL places minimal restrictions on the use of the content itself. That is more than can be said for the GFDL. The GFDL places several different kinds of restrictions on the content itself, none of which appears to be either necessary or sufficient for the effective protection of software freedom. We are supposed to accept these restrictions on the grounds that RMS doesn't find them too onerous. That just isn't good enough, at least for Debian's purposes. So I hope that a future unified content license is modelled on the current GPL, not on the GFDL. -- Thomas Hood ________________________________________________________________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/
