Shouldn Debian allow documents which describe standards to be non-modifiable? Why should we need the same freedoms as for code?
We have three reasons: such a restriction is unnecessary; it is useless; and it is not true that it would be less appropriate for code than for documentation.First, misrepresentation can be prevented without forbidding anyone to modify the work, by requiring all modified works to not claim that they are the original work or that they were written by the original authors; so, the restriction is unnecessary.Furthermore, a clause in a copyright license would not prevent someone misrepresenting the work or its authors. For example, I might create a new, original document titled RFC 2821, Simple Mail Transfer Protocol with a distorted description of SMTP, and with this action I would not be contravening the license of the IETF’s RFC 2821. The proper defense against this are the various laws dealing with libel, fraud and impersonation. So, such a restriction would be useless.
Related Questions
- Does the code of conduct required under the Mass. Rules follow the standards in the PhRMA and AdvaMed Codes for financial relationships with physicians?
- Is there one water softener certified to NSF-42, NSF-44, and Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC) standards, or will I have to buy more than one piece of equipment?
- Shouldn Debian allow documents which describe standards to be non-modifiable? Why should we need the same freedoms as for code?
