lh | 9ed821d | 2023-04-07 01:36:19 -0700 | [diff] [blame^] | 1 | @c freemanuals.texi - blurb for free documentation. |
| 2 | @c This file is intended to be included within another document, |
| 3 | @c hence no sectioning command or @node. |
| 4 | |
| 5 | @cindex free documentation |
| 6 | |
| 7 | The biggest deficiency in the free software community today is not in |
| 8 | the software---it is the lack of good free documentation that we can |
| 9 | include with the free software. Many of our most important |
| 10 | programs do not come with free reference manuals and free introductory |
| 11 | texts. Documentation is an essential part of any software package; |
| 12 | when an important free software package does not come with a free |
| 13 | manual and a free tutorial, that is a major gap. We have many such |
| 14 | gaps today. |
| 15 | |
| 16 | Consider Perl, for instance. The tutorial manuals that people |
| 17 | normally use are non-free. How did this come about? Because the |
| 18 | authors of those manuals published them with restrictive terms---no |
| 19 | copying, no modification, source files not available---which exclude |
| 20 | them from the free software world. |
| 21 | |
| 22 | That wasn't the first time this sort of thing happened, and it was far |
| 23 | from the last. Many times we have heard a GNU user eagerly describe a |
| 24 | manual that he is writing, his intended contribution to the community, |
| 25 | only to learn that he had ruined everything by signing a publication |
| 26 | contract to make it non-free. |
| 27 | |
| 28 | Free documentation, like free software, is a matter of freedom, not |
| 29 | price. The problem with the non-free manual is not that publishers |
| 30 | charge a price for printed copies---that in itself is fine. (The Free |
| 31 | Software Foundation sells printed copies of manuals, too.) The |
| 32 | problem is the restrictions on the use of the manual. Free manuals |
| 33 | are available in source code form, and give you permission to copy and |
| 34 | modify. Non-free manuals do not allow this. |
| 35 | |
| 36 | The criteria of freedom for a free manual are roughly the same as for |
| 37 | free software. Redistribution (including the normal kinds of |
| 38 | commercial redistribution) must be permitted, so that the manual can |
| 39 | accompany every copy of the program, both on-line and on paper. |
| 40 | |
| 41 | Permission for modification of the technical content is crucial too. |
| 42 | When people modify the software, adding or changing features, if they |
| 43 | are conscientious they will change the manual too---so they can |
| 44 | provide accurate and clear documentation for the modified program. A |
| 45 | manual that leaves you no choice but to write a new manual to document |
| 46 | a changed version of the program is not really available to our |
| 47 | community. |
| 48 | |
| 49 | Some kinds of limits on the way modification is handled are |
| 50 | acceptable. For example, requirements to preserve the original |
| 51 | author's copyright notice, the distribution terms, or the list of |
| 52 | authors, are ok. It is also no problem to require modified versions |
| 53 | to include notice that they were modified. Even entire sections that |
| 54 | may not be deleted or changed are acceptable, as long as they deal |
| 55 | with nontechnical topics (like this one). These kinds of restrictions |
| 56 | are acceptable because they don't obstruct the community's normal use |
| 57 | of the manual. |
| 58 | |
| 59 | However, it must be possible to modify all the @emph{technical} |
| 60 | content of the manual, and then distribute the result in all the usual |
| 61 | media, through all the usual channels. Otherwise, the restrictions |
| 62 | obstruct the use of the manual, it is not free, and we need another |
| 63 | manual to replace it. |
| 64 | |
| 65 | Please spread the word about this issue. Our community continues to |
| 66 | lose manuals to proprietary publishing. If we spread the word that |
| 67 | free software needs free reference manuals and free tutorials, perhaps |
| 68 | the next person who wants to contribute by writing documentation will |
| 69 | realize, before it is too late, that only free manuals contribute to |
| 70 | the free software community. |
| 71 | |
| 72 | If you are writing documentation, please insist on publishing it under |
| 73 | the GNU Free Documentation License or another free documentation |
| 74 | license. Remember that this decision requires your approval---you |
| 75 | don't have to let the publisher decide. Some commercial publishers |
| 76 | will use a free license if you insist, but they will not propose the |
| 77 | option; it is up to you to raise the issue and say firmly that this is |
| 78 | what you want. If the publisher you are dealing with refuses, please |
| 79 | try other publishers. If you're not sure whether a proposed license |
| 80 | is free, write to @email{licensing@@gnu.org}. |
| 81 | |
| 82 | You can encourage commercial publishers to sell more free, copylefted |
| 83 | manuals and tutorials by buying them, and particularly by buying |
| 84 | copies from the publishers that paid for their writing or for major |
| 85 | improvements. Meanwhile, try to avoid buying non-free documentation |
| 86 | at all. Check the distribution terms of a manual before you buy it, |
| 87 | and insist that whoever seeks your business must respect your freedom. |
| 88 | Check the history of the book, and try reward the publishers that have |
| 89 | paid or pay the authors to work on it. |
| 90 | |
| 91 | The Free Software Foundation maintains a list of free documentation |
| 92 | published by other publishers, at |
| 93 | @url{http://www.fsf.org/doc/other-free-books.html}. |