discuss: Proposal for revised license and license requirements.
Subject:
Re: Proposal for revised license and license requirements.
From:
Rick Moen ####@####.####
Date:
17 Jun 2005 18:50:29 -0000
Message-Id: <20050617185027.GD5977@linuxmafia.com>
Quoting Mysid ####@####.####
> To maintain control of what it serves it shouldn't need to be.
You seem to be playing games with words.
> Presumably people other than those running the LDP aren't able to
> just stick whatever tarballs they like on the LDP servers and have
> them distributed as "LDP documents".
And here, you seem to be trying to argue with some position I have not
stated and do not hold.
Edward's post was:
It is perfectly within the rights of TLDP, as publisher, to offer
a contract or license that says that nobody can change _this
version_ of a document, but that the community is entirely free
to use anything in it in creating a new version, clearly
identified as such, when needed.
I read Edward's use of the words "publisher" and "offer" as
contemplating LDP enforcing its wishes as a party with legal standing.
If that's not what he intended, I'm sure he can clarify.
