discuss: gnu fdl
Subject:
Re: gnu fdl
From:
Frank Lichtenheld ####@####.####
Date:
13 Nov 2003 16:53:59 -0000
Message-Id: <20031113165402.GA560@djpig.de>
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 07:42:25PM +0530, rahul wrote:
> hi
>
> In case you have any doubt about this, RMS mailed me once about a document
> that i had written which was licensed under FDL and told me that it was a
> violation of the license if a copy itself wasnt included. He also
> specifically told me that a link to the license is not sufficient. My LDP FAQ
> is also affected by this. If I include a copy it becomes more than the actual
> content itself. I am thinking of relicensing it under something different.
> Any ideas?
>
> if nobody suggests any particular license Tabatha please relicense it under
> GPL for the next revision. oops! should i include a copy of the GPL then?
You should:
See http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhyMustIInclude
and the GPL, section 1
Gruesse,
--
Frank Lichtenheld ####@####.####
www: http://www.djpig.de/
