Sanford Forte wrote:
If a school district, or a private printer, want to
satisfy the general frameworks required by a
specific state, *all* of the material should be
able to clear, *without* hassles.
How is mixing and matching incompatible licenses in the same book making
things easier? All this does is make it a bigger hassle for the school
districts; now instead of adhering to the terms of one license, they have to
adhere to the terms of more than one and possibly many.
For maximum impact, *every* basic curriculum taken
on by WP should have *all* materials available as
non-GNU-limited...even if that means starting from
scratch with some modules for which there is already
GNU-limited content available.
What is so limiting about the GNU FDL? It was specifically written for
textbooks and manuals.
I can just see a sales representative form Prentice
Hall
(all the way up to the CEO of that company's textbook
division) wining and dining textbook committee people
from various states and bringing stuff like this up just
before srucial votes are cast to accept or not accept
certain books for district consideration.
And they would not do the same for any other copyleft textbook?
Also, I can see the 'copyright police',
prompted by
commercial publishers, trying to intimidate privae
and home schools into doing certain things with
GNU-limited material. This industry knows how to
use 'dirty'tricks to get its way.
Since the text is free, then how are they going to do that? We already plan to
work with the GNU people to fix the parts of the license we don't like.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)