Re: [ode] [rms@gnu.org: Re: Updating the OpenContent license]


David Lawyer (dave@lafn.org)
Fri, 21 Jan 2000 19:52:16 -0800


On Thu, Jan 20, 2000 at 10:36:21PM -0700, Richard Stallman wrote:
>
> It is unreliable not to include the license in the work that it
> covers. Over the years, they could get separated; then the user would
> have no clear statement of his or her rights. Things are changing so
> fast that it is impossible to be confident that any particular URL
> will still work five years from now. It is hard to be confident that
> URLs will make any sense twenty years from now.

You're right that the license could become lost but what about my proposal
to have a 2-part license. The tiny part would be attached to all docs
and would only be a couple of sentences long: Please freely copy and
distribute this document. If you wish to modify it see the GFDL
License version x.x at http://....

This short license fragment would satisfy most people who may only
want to copy the document or put it on their website. When a document
is no longer in widespread use, then the full license could be
attached to it. Also (or as an alternative) the full license could be
found in the source document as previously suggested. These two items
should be suggestions not contained in the license itself.

>
> Perhaps someday, if free software becomes greatly accepted, these
> licenses will be available from official sources, and we could refer
> to it just as we refer to the US Constitution

For this and other reasons licenses need to be flexible. I think that
the license should only require a pointer in the document to the
license (and the name and version of the license to help find it
should the URL no longer exist). Suggestions should not be part of
the license so that they can be removed when it becomes obsolete.

Another point is this. Suppose that after 10 or 20 years after the
document was no longer maintained the license can't be found. But by
then the document is likely quite obsolete and it's unlikely that
anyone would need to modify it. So not much harm would result even if
the license was lost.

-- 
			David Lawyer



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Jan 22 2000 - 00:47:45 EST