simpleLinux Open Documentation License (sLODL)

nights nights at
Sun Oct 1 22:10:53 UTC 2000

Consider:    You want people to be able to copy freely (can do that in
copyright notification easily, yeah). You want people to be able to modify,
comment, and re-use the work, while it remaining *completely* clear which
parts are the original work (without having to read a sperate document). You
want the license to clearly tackle issues such as quotation, referencing,
republication in other (non-transparent) media. The only other liecnse doing
this is the GNU FDL, which does it wrong IMHO, by being too complex and
legalistic, and rather unclear.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Moen" <rick at>
To: <license-discuss at>
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 11:04 PM
Subject: Re: simpleLinux Open Documentation License (sLODL)

> begin SamBC quotation:
> > Only one I saw was GNU FDL which was even less simple, and had some
> > clauses I disliked.
> It strikes me that writings in electronic format, that you want to be
> distributable that way, fall roughly into two categories: ones that
> express your personal views and that you therefore want to remain
> unchanged, and ones whose further modification you want to encourage.

What about ones you want people to ad too, or comment, but not actually
change what you said?

> As author Michael Stutz says:  'The GNU GPL references the "source code"
> of a work; this "source code" will mean different things for different
> kinds of information, but the definition of "source code" -- provided in
> the GNU GPL -- holds true in any case: "The source code for a work means
> the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it."'

And I would like that restriction to be much looser - as long as it may be
modified with free (libre) software, it's okay in my book.

> Just a couple of options to consider.

Thankyou. I really do consider your points, but I had done previously. You
seem not (no offence, no flame) to be seeing my point of view. But little
matter - I only asked for opinions!


More information about the License-discuss mailing list