[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] The FSF Allows No Derivatives,

From: arthur_torrey
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] The FSF Allows No Derivatives,
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2015 01:38:14 +0000 (UTC)

My recollection is that there are different 'section types' in the Gnu Free 
Documentation License (GFDL) and most of them DO allow derivative works.  The 
only exception is the 'invariant' sections, which don't.  The invariant 
sections are usually supposed to be 'editorial comment' like the words of RMS, 
which shouldn't be modified for reasons stated in earlier messages because of 
the risks of misrepresenting the writer.  

The only real issue I've heard in the way of complaints about the GFDL is that 
if trying to do a compilation of multiple GFDL documents (i.e. if trying to put 
together a manual on using a GNU based system) then it becomes problematic to 
deal with the invariant sections which are largely duplicative and supposedly 
have to be kept with the main part of the document.  I haven't tried doing this 
sort of thing so no first hand experience to confirm or deny this...

In terms of RMS saying that "creating derivatives of published works without 
permission is morally ok, but not translations. Translations are not ok."  I'm 
not going to comment on morality, but my understanding of Copyright law is that 
publishing a direct translation violates the Copyright holder's rights - but 
the US Supreme Court has said that derivatives (at least parodies) are 
protected works - I forget the case name, but it involved a book called "The 
Wind Done Gone" which was a parody of 'Gone With the Wind' which told the story 
from the viewpoint of one of the slaves....  Thus RMS is correct from a legal 
standpoint.  (Note, IANAL)


========== Original Message ================

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 20:40:13 -0500
From: "J.B. Nicholson-Owens" <>
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] The FSF Allows No Derivatives,
Message-ID: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

Ali Abdul Ghani wrote:

I'm guessing you pointed us to this article because you wished to
discuss the article. Here are my views on this article.
<much trimmed>

Arthur Torrey - <>

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]