Start for a discussion about free documentation in Debian.
Hello.
This is my initial document I want the discussion to base on. If you
consider parts of this to be controversial for you, you are welcome to
participate and discuss the content on the Debian policy list,
debian-policy@lists.debian.org.
Please follow up only to debian-policy. Thank you,
Marcus
Data Entities and the Debian project
====================================
I would like to extend the discussion to the general term "data entities".
This term shall be used for every representation of a work that is not
necessarily the source code of a computer program. For examples, a
collection of images can be understood as a collection of data entities, as
well as a pile of books with the pictures printed inside them. The
distinction between the work and the medium this work is presented in will
have to be made in the whole discussion.
Furthermore, I want to limit this discussion on data entities that should be
distributed with the MAIN Debian distribution. The definitions of the
contrib and non-free section will be clear when we made the decision for the
main distribution (non-free contains verbatim distributable data entities
that fails our cathorization of free, and contrib will contain free data
entities that depend on non-free components).
It must be allowed for data entitties to be distributed at all (otherwise we
can't put them on the ftp site) --- this is assumed from this very moment.
Furthermore, we have to discuss two things:
a) How is the DFSG to be interpreted if applied to data entities? Are there
things that have to be changed in the dfsg to make this interpretation more
clear?
b) Beside dfsg free data entities, which data entities do we also allow in
the Debian distribution?
My proposal is not to change the dfsg with regard to data entities, but to
allow exceptions from the dfsg for special entities. This exceptions have to
be specified and decided on (see below).
The DFSG
========
With this apporach, dfsg free documents are always able to enter the Debian
main distribution. Let's take a look at the requirements:
> 1. Free Redistribution
>
> The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from
> selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate
> software distribution containing programs from several different
> sources. The license may not require a royalty or other fee for such
> sale.
Explanation: This requirement covers VERBATIM distribution, which must be
allowed for everyone, with no fee.
Applicable? Yes, although the wording is software specific. It doesn't even
mention the medium in which the data is transported, but it is implied that
it may not be dependend on the medium I use ((NOTE: this does not mean that
I can print a sgml book and sell it, as printing is a conversion [read:
compilation], and must be granted in the license elsewhere to be allowed.
But it means that I can print the sgml source in a book and sell it, as it
would just be a verbatim copy. The distinction is hopefully clear to
everyone.))
> 2. Source Code
>
> The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in
> source code as well as compiled form.
Explanation: The source code is the preferred format to make modifications
to the documentation, and is pretty important for the Debian distribution,
otherwise we can't really maintain the data entity. For example, nobody
wants to change the PostScript output, so a manual in PostScript only would
fail this requirement. There are cases where this can be hard to decide (for
example, jpg pictures could be originated from GIMP native format, which is
preferred to make changes). The decision, what the source code is, would be
made by the original author in all cases I can think of.
Applicable? Yes, without changes.
> 3. Derived Works
>
> The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow
> them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the
> original software.
This is the core point. This is the essential requirement for us to be able
to maintain a technical document. For example, if the upstream author
abandons a document, we can continue working on it. As "derived works" is
the way free software works, I don't think I need to go further in the
details why this is a necessary requirement for a data entity to be free.
Apllicable? Yes, without changes.
> 4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code
>
> The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified
> form _only if the license allows the distribution of "patch files" with
> the source code for the purpose of modifying the program at build time.
> The license must explicitly permit distribution of software built from
> modified source code. The license may require derived works to carry a
> different name or version number from the original software. (This is a
> compromise. The Debian group encourages all authors to not restrict any
> files, source or binary, from being modified.)
Explanation: Some people are frightened, that derived works may destroy the
integrity of their work (for example standard documents, but see further
below also about this). To make them feel better about it, we allow some
restrictions. The original source will ever remain identificable, and changes
are clearly marked. Even a name change may be required, to make it obvious
without error that this is a derived work.
Applicable? Yes, but the wording would need to be changed, as it explicitely
mentions "software" and "binary". The point is, that it also must be allowed
to distribute modified (for example converted or printed) data entities.
I want to stress this: The right to distribute verbatim copies of the
sources and to derive a new work doesn't grant me the right to convert the
data in other formats, for example the sgml->ps conversion. This is
necessary to make the work useful, so it should be allowed, too.
> 5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
>
> The license must not discriminate against any person or group of
> persons.
This point is pretty clear, and I don't know of any violation. For example,
a book source may not be restricted to one publisher only.
> 6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
>
> The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in
> a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the
> program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic
> research.
I don't think anyone will object to this one.
> 9. License Must Not Contaminate Other Software
>
> The license must not place restrictions on other software that is
> distributed along with the licensed software. For example, the license
> must not insist that all other programs distributed on the same medium
> must be free software.
The same should be true for data entities. Any objections against this? This
would for example mean, that a book that consists of multiple distinct
parts, can incorporate free parts as well as non-free additions, which I
find very reasonable.
> 10. Example Licenses
This is the task of the Open Content group. I'll make weekly reports about
the progress.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary: I think a document should be dfsg-free in general to be acceptable
for the main distribution. I can't see any reason to compromise any of our
requirements for free software. I think the analogy sotfware = data
entities, binaries = converted formats and so on is correct.
The rationale why we need the requirements is exactly the same as for free
software. Everyone who disagrees with me at this point should provide a
detailed explanation why we should compromise any of the requirements in
general, for technical documents ((NOTE: At this time, I'm not speaking
about possible exceptions, see below)).
The importance of dfsg free documentation is stressed with the integration
of source code and documentation (for example cweb).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The exceptions
==============
There are some valid exceptions to the general rule, that a data entity may
fail the requirements although it is a worthful addition to the mmain
distribution. I try to collect them here. Please don't try to tweak the dfsg
to cover this data entities, too, I don't think that this will work (it will
most certainly produce irritating results and a flame war). It is my opinion
that these should be handled as exceptions only, with well defined scopes.
A. Fair Use
-----------
Fair use is the quoting of small parts of a whole work, with acknowledges to
the author. Fair use is already granted by the Bern convention, and
therefore there is no need that this is explicitely stated in the copyright.
The Debian distribution can always quote small parts of copyrighted
documents verbatim without legal problems.
B. Legal entities
-----------------
B.1 Trademarks - The use of trademarks is restricted for certain purposes. But
this does not mean that we have to banish all use of trademarks in the
Debian distribution.
I suggest that the use of trademarks is allowed in the scope granted by
common trademark law.
B.2 Licenses - A license is a legal document, therefore it makes sense to
allow only verbatim copying. On the other hand, the Debian interest has no
interest in changing a license. Note that copying verbatim from the legal
text is allowed (either by arguing that it is fair use, or just by arguing
that the legal phrases are in the public domain).
Therefore, I think the Debian distribution should be allowed to contain
licenses that are restricted to verbatim copy only.
C. Opinions
-----------
Data entities that represent a personal opinion (for example political
essays, private email etc) are not of technical content. Therefore there is
no need for Debian to change them. A personal opinion can never be "wrong"
in a technical sense, so there is no need to "correct" it. One could argue
that I want to derive my personal opinion from the opinion of somebody else,
but there are a few things to consider:
a) Ideas can't be copyrighted.
b) You have the right of fair use.
c) You have the right to express your opinion or make a parody from other
works.
Considering this and considering that Debian is a software distribution with
mainly technical interests, we should allow personals opinion in the
distribution which are copyrighted under a stricter license than the dfsg
would allow.
Examples: a) Private email correspondence with upstream authors (with the
authors agreement, of course).
b) Essays, manifests, etc. of general interest, but with non-technical
content or purpose. For example, the file /usr/doc/debian/debian-manifesto.
D. Standards
------------
Some people are saying that we should allow the integration of standard
documents in the main distribution. I have the following reservations:
[NOTE: Personally I would like to include standards in main, but it is a
compromise to our ideal, and should not be taken easily. If you look at the
success we had with solely free software, I wonder why this should not
be equally possible with free documentation.]
a) What is the definition of a standard?
One could argue that software can set standards, too. For example Suns
Java sets the standard for the Java language, even beyond the scope of every
technical document ("bug-for-bug-compatibility" comes to mind). But
nevertheless we don't accept it in our main distribution.
b) Why should we accept that we can't derive from a standard?
I'm always wondering why people are *afraid* that such a thing could
happen. If the standard writers do their job well, the free software
community honours it and follows. And if the license requires a name
change, people who distribute different versions under the same name are
already violating the copyright (so the stricter license wouldn't stop them,
too). I'm always wondering that people are afraid that a standard could
be subverted, but nobody is afraid that somebody releases a gcc that adds
back-doors to all executables compiled with it. It is clear to me that
people would only follow a derived standard if it is significantly better,
and then there is a problem with the standard anyway.
One could argue, that the Sun Java compiler is the implementation of a
standard, and modifying it could cause a great damage to the standard.
Nevertheless, we don't include it in the main distribution for good reasons.
So, not to be allowed to change a standard has the same disadvantages as with
software. We can't fix bugs, and we can't derive a different version from
it when it is abandoned or doesn't fulfill our purposes.
Example: The FHSS (the fictive successor of the FHS), mandates that all
files should be in the root directory, subdirectories are depreciated.
This is obviously non-sense, but somebody would have to write a new
standard, because the FHS is not free for modifications.
In short, we have to take the standard "as is", or drop it completely and
start our own.
In short: I don't think there is a technical reason to disallow derived
works even from standards. I'm eager to hear technical reasons, but I'm
afraid that they simply not exist. The fear that some people express
(standards could be subverted) is simply not substantiated yet.
I know that many people will disagree with the things I wrote in section D.
Please don't flame me. I really tried hard to think of technical reasons to
allow standards with a strict copyright in the main distribution, but no
luck. If you think you have compelling reasons, please add them to the
discussion, thank you.
What follows is a draft for a possible license (dfsg free) based on the GPL.
I replaced the term that referred to an official entity with ****, because this
document is not official. But you should get the idea. Note the distinction
between original work, derived work and converted work (= format change) in
section 1, 2 and 3. I think it is essential in this discussion.
*** *** LICENSE
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
0. This License applies to any work which contains a notice placed
by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under the terms
of this **** **** License. The "**** ****" (**), below, refers
to any such work, and a "work based on the **** ****" means either
the ** or any derivative work under copyright law: that is to say, a
work containing the ** or a portion of it, either verbatim or with
modifications and/or translated into another language. (Hereinafter,
translation is included without limitation in the term "modification".)
Each licensee is addressed as "you".
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not
covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of
using the ** for any purpose beside copying, distribution and
modification is not restricted.
1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the **'s
data files as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate
copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the
notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty;
and give any other recipients of the ** a copy of this License
along with the **.
You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and
you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee.
2. You may modify your copy or copies of the ** or any portion
of it, thus forming a work based on the **, and copy and
distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1
above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices
stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
whole or in part contains or is derived from the ** or any
part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
parties under the terms of this License.
These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If
identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the **,
and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those
sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you
distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based
on the **, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of
this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the
entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest
your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to
exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or
collective works based on the Program.
In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the **
with the ** (or with a work based on the **) on a volume of
a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under
the scope of this License.
3. You may copy and distribute the ** (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) processed with software tools to convert it to
another format and/or medium under the terms of Sections 1 and 2
above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
data files, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
machine-readable copy of the corresponding data files, to be
distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
customarily used for software interchange; or,
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer
to distribute corresponding data files. (This alternative is
allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you
received the program in object code or executable form with such
an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
The data files for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it. For a conversion to another format and/or
medium, complete data files means all data files for all parts it conatains,
plus any associated data files that are needed to process the file with the
software tools, plus the scripts used to control conversion of the work.
If distribution of converted data files is made by offering
access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent
access to copy the data files from the same place counts as
distribution of the data files, even though third parties are not
compelled to copy the data files along with the converted files.
4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the **
except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt
otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the ** is
void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License.
However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under
this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such
parties remain in full compliance.
5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not
signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or
distribute the ** or its derivative works. These actions are
prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by
modifying or distributing the ** (or any work based on the **),
you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and
all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying
the Program or works based on it.
6. Each time you redistribute the ** (or any work based on the **),
the recipient automatically receives a license from the original
licensor to copy, distribute or modify the ** subject to
these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further
restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to
this License.
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent
infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues),
conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or
otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not
excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot
distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this
License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you
may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent
license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the ** by
all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then
the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to
refrain entirely from distribution of the **.
If any portion of this section is held invalid or unenforceable under
any particular circumstance, the balance of the section is intended to
apply and the section as a whole is intended to apply in other
circumstances.
It is not the purpose of this section to induce you to infringe any
patents or other property right claims or to contest validity of any
such claims; this section has the sole purpose of protecting the
integrity of the ** distribution system, which is
implemented by public license practices. Many people have made
generous contributions to the wide range of software distributed
through that system in reliance on consistent application of that
system; it is up to the author/donor to decide if he or she is willing
to distribute software through any other system and a licensee cannot
impose that choice.
This section is intended to make thoroughly clear what is believed to
be a consequence of the rest of this License.
8. If the distribution and/or use of the ** is restricted in
certain countries either by patents or by copyrighted interfaces, the
original copyright holder who places the ** under this License
may add an explicit geographical distribution limitation excluding
those countries, so that distribution is permitted only in or among
countries not thus excluded. In such case, this License incorporates
the limitation as if written in the body of this License.
9. The **** **** group may publish revised and/or new versions
of the **** **** License from time to time. Such new versions will
be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to
address new problems or concerns.
Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the **
specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any
later version", you have the option of following the terms and conditions
either of that version or of any later version published by the **** ****
group. If the ** does not specify a version number of
this License, you may choose any version ever published by the **** ****
group.
10. If you wish to incorporate parts of the ** into other free
programs whose distribution conditions are different, write to the author
to ask for permission.
NO WARRANTY
11. BECAUSE THE **** *** IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO WARRANTY
FOR THE **** ***, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN
OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES
PROVIDE THE **** *** "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK OF
USE OF THE **** *** IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE **** *** PROVE FAULTY,
INACCURATE OR OTHERWISE UNACCEPTABLE YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY
REPAIR OR CORRECTION.
12. IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING
WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR
REDISTRIBUTE THE **** *** AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES,
INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING
OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE **** ***, EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER
PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
--
"Rhubarb is no Egyptian god." Debian GNU/Linux finger brinkmd@
Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.org master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de for public PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: