"Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Last year, when the controversy over whether the DFSG applies to > documentation (in particular GNU-FDL-ed documentation), I meant to > mention to someone (but promptly forgot) that the license under > which the text of the FSF's licenses (GPL, LGPL, FDL) are licensed > is much stricter than even the FDL so cearly violates the DFSG (if > they apply to it). > > The GPL &c are allowed to be copied only in full without any modifications. Sigh. Actually, you are allowed to modify the license terms. You are just not allowed to modify the preamble. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ModifyGPL However, I'm sure that there are lots of other licenses whose terms are not licensed in DFSG-free conditions. My feel for the consensus is that Debian generally makes an exception for license terms. So you could certainly make the case that Debian should strip out the preamble. It hasn't seemed all that pressing, I guess. There hasn't been much abuse so far. Regards, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
