Creative Commons people working on

Imran wrote:
>Because the CC equivalent license is not equivalent, there 
>are many minor sections where the GFDL doesn't allow 
>something allowed by CC, for instance the section on 
>Opaque/Transparent sections. 

They are different license, so of course there are going to be slightly 
different terms! If somebody doesn't want their work to be transferable to CC 
by-sa then all they would have to do is invoke a single invariant section 
and/or add a front or backcover text. 

The whole point of free content is to maximize re-use while making sure nobody 
can make derivative works proprietary. 

>(rhetorical)
>More important then the principles the FSF was founded on ?

CC by-sa is a /freer/ license than the GNU FDL (the Debian people even 
maintain that it is not a copyleft license since it allows for invariant 
sections). I really fail to see how having interoperability between the two 
major free content licenses would not be a very good thing.

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)