Anton Zinoviev <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 01:41:42PM +0000, Roger Leigh wrote: >> >> > >> >> > I think the following is an useful test. If the license forbids some >> >> > modification that is necessary in order to adapt the document to some >> >> > need, then the document is non-free. Otherwise, that is if the >> >> > license does not forbid any necessary modification, the document may >> >> > be free. >> >> >> >> This is no good. Where is it defined what is "necessary", and who >> >> deems what is "necessary"? What /I/ consider to be necessary may be >> >> considered "unnecessary" (and hence, not allowed) by the copyright >> >> holders. >> > >> > I don't think we disagree what "necessary" means. >> >> Please answer the question I asked: Where is it defined what is >> "necessary", and who deems what is "necessary"? > > OK. The modification is necessary in order to adapt the document to > some need if there is no way to adapt the document to serve the > purpose in question without this modification. Please could you still answer my question: *Who* defines what is "necessary"? Your partial answer above also appears to be nothing more than your personal opinion. Can you properly justify your reasoning with a detailed rationale? I think we need something rather more concrete than the personal opinion of a single developer for something which has important ramifications. It's all still rather too vague and handwavy to be of any practical use. Regards, Roger -- Roger Leigh Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/ GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848. Please sign and encrypt your mail.
Description: PGP signature