3 ms·
Doesn't this violate the license of the license? The very first paragraph says that "changing it is not allowed" – or "no one can change it" in this changed ver
by ptx 2y ago
Doesn't this violate the license of the license? The very first paragraph says that "changing it is not allowed" – or "no one can change it" in this changed version.
And calling it "GNU" and attributing it (only) to the Free Software Foundation, when they didn't publish this modified version, seems inappropriate. I don't know if the FSF have trademarks on these terms, but this is the kind of confusion trademarks are meant to protect against.
As a final nitpick, I believe (but I might be wrong about this) the phrase "General Public License" is intended to mean a license for the general public, so changing "General" to "Justified" wouldn't make sense in that case (as it would mean that the public is justified, not the license).
(Neat trick nevertheless.)
- jraph 2y agoI believe you can change it as long as you change the name, which this thing does. (not sure, though, indeed the text doesn't seem to permit derivatives as is) However, keeping GNU in the name might be problematic. (and yes, I'm impressed that the justification never uses 2 consecutive spaces or other such tricks)
- dessimus 2y ago> However, keeping GNU in the name might be problematic. Problematic?! I would imagine even an L1 could prove that the Justified version is still Not Unix.
- an_ko 2y agoParody is fair use, and this is part of a submission to SIGBOVIK 2024. http://tom7.org/bovex/ http://tom7.org/bovex/ It's also clearly not competing with the original, since its contents are partially nonsense.