Re: GFDL 1.3

2008/11/4 Alex Hudson <home@...>:

> I think MJ is essentially right that there isn't a good treatment of
> what "free documents" actually are. I dislike the Debian approach which
> attempts bitstream-blindness, although it makes sense in the context of
> a digital distribution. I like parts of the GFDL, including the clarity
> on non-digital distribution, the anti-DRM stuff (modulo comments about
> whether it properly achieves the aim), etc. But the "Grand Unified
> Theory" that Eben Moglen has spoken of previously seems to be still out
> of reach.

FWIW, Wikimedia uses the http://freedomdefined.org definition (which
happens to have been written by Erik Moeller from Wikimedia).

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:File_types speaks of
patent-encumbered formats not being free enough for WMF purposes.

- d.