Re: A license needed for authentic/consistency purposes

[Mohammed Adnène Trojette <adn at diwi dot org>]

On Sun, Dec 23, 2007, moayyad sadi wrote:
> This is posted to both docs and developer mailing lists
> please each discuse the related license to your mailing list only
> (in doc GFDL and alike, in dev GPL and alike)
> 
> I'm having problems with radical people in Debian who consider
> GNU *Free* Documentation License (GFDL)
> not free engough for them

Not every GFDL in not free enough according to Debian Free Software
Guidelines: GFDL-licensed works without unmodifiable sections are free

According http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001

> I'm thinking of a license just like GPL but the this extra term:
> * degrading authentication procedures IS NOT PERMITTED,
> inauthentic (or impure or inconsistent) software as defined by the
> original author or
> according to original software checking procedure (GPG) should always
> appear as impure or inconsistent in the derived work.

This won't be a free license as soon as some kind of modification is
prohibited. It is the same with limitation of use ("legal").

> I have a question does any use of terms in Artistic license satisfy DFSG
> or is it conditional like GFDL

The Artistic license satisfies the DFSG (see DFSG#10 on
http://www.debian.org/social_contract.en.html).

-- 
Mohammed Adnène Trojette