[Bf-docboard] OCL vs FDL

[Felix Rabe]

Hi Ton.

On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 19:46:38 +0100
Ton Roosendaal <ton@blender.org> wrote:

> "You may not charge a fee for the OC itself"

OC = Open Content - just in case, but I think you already got that...

> Explain to me, how you can ever 'sell' the Blender GPL-ed sources? You 
> can't. The GNU GPL license simply excludes that.

Tell me how it does exclude that?  Explicitly?

> Here's what the FSF says about it themselves:

> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html

> A quote:

A good one.

> "we suggest it is better to avoid using the term ``selling software'' 
> and choose some other wording instead. For example, you could say 
> ``distributing free software for a fee''--that is unambiguous. "

Again: "You may not charge a fee for the OC itself", i.e. (?) you may
not distribute OC for a fee?

Anyway, for mortal people, "distribute ... for a fee" and "charge a fee
for ..." means the same, so if the OCL excludes that, it is not a free
documentation license.  If it does not, then the OCL makes a very bad
job at being a free doc. license, since it makes misleading statements.

cu,
Felix