Re: Verbatim copying

On 20 Nov 2003 at 2:25, Daniel Mayer wrote:

> Martin wrote:
> >THREE: You must link to a *local* copy of the GFDL. The copy 
> >on gnu.org is not an acceptable substitute.

This section of the GFDL is approximately equivalent to the same section 
in the GPL which states "give any other recipients of the Program a copy 
of this License along with the Program". I quote from the FAQ at 
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhyMustIInclude

> "Q:Why does the GPL require including a copy of the GPL with every copy of the program?"

> "Including a copy of the license with the work is vital so that everyone who gets a copy of the program can know what his rights are."

> "It might be tempting to include a URL that refers to the license, instead of the license itself. But you cannot be sure that the URL will still be valid, five years or ten years from now. Twenty years from now, URLs as we know them today may no longer exist."

> "The only way to make sure that people who have copies of the program will continue to be able to see the license, despite all the changes that will happen in the network, is to include a copy of the license in the program."

That's the basis for my belief that a local copy is required. However, there 
is no equivalent question in the GFDL FAQ, and it may be that the GFDL 
is less strict in this regard.

----

Mav quotes: "H. Include an unaltered copy of this License"

4H applies to modified versions. For verbatim copies, the equivalent is: 
"You may copy [...] provided that this License [is] reproduced in all copies". 
The practical result is the same, of course.

I've made the assumption that the act of printing is included within the 
concept of verbatim copying.

-Martin