discuss: new documentation license


Previous by date: 24 Nov 2003 02:25:52 -0000 Re: the good the bad and the ugly, doug jensen
Next by date: 24 Nov 2003 02:25:52 -0000 Re: new documentation license, Rodolfo J. Paiz
Previous in thread: 24 Nov 2003 02:25:52 -0000 Re: new documentation license, Andy Oram
Next in thread: 24 Nov 2003 02:25:52 -0000 Re: new documentation license, Rodolfo J. Paiz

Subject: Re: new documentation license
From: "Rodolfo J. Paiz" ####@####.####
Date: 24 Nov 2003 02:25:52 -0000
Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.0.20031123192553.025be8c8@mail.simpaticus.com>

At 01:35 11/23/2003, jdd wrote:
>as many ldp authors I don't hope any financial return from my work here 
>and so for me the licence is only here to insure the free spreading of docs.

I'll add a couple more (not an exhaustive list by any means):

         1. the license is there to make sure that no one changes my words 
and still distributes it under my name. If the document says I wrote it, I 
really did write it. No modifications made without my authorization. Of 
course, in light of recent conversations, I'd happily accept a proviso: 
since I created this document primarily to help the LDP, then if the LDP 
determines that I am not maintaining the doc adequately and they cannot 
reach me or come to an acceptable agreement with me, then they may change 
the doc to say "authored and maintained by RJP until yyyy-mm-dd, now 
maintained by XYZ" or some such text.

         2. the license is there to protect me. It is there to ensure that 
I do not get sued (in USA and other litigious countries) for trying to help 
a fellow human being.

         3. the license is there to ensure that, if I put dozens of 
man-hours into a document, no one is allowed to directly profit from the 
copying, reproduction, distribution, etc. of my document in any way... 
except, of course, for any monies that are contributed to LDP since, again, 
I wrote this to aid LDP. If someone publishes, prints, and sells a book of 
the collected HOWTO's and then donates profits to LDP, that's fine by me.

>can't the ldp propose one and only one licence?
>
>it should be easy to have to categories: ldp licence - free but non ldp 
>licence - if necessary.
>
>but one can't keep reading licences again and again..

I suggest that the LDP, as being one project with one identity, should 
indeed promote one and only one license for those works it accepts into its 
collection. This would allow for uniform treatment, such as when printing 
the above-mentioned book.


-- 
Rodolfo J. Paiz
####@####.####


Previous by date: 24 Nov 2003 02:25:52 -0000 Re: the good the bad and the ugly, doug jensen
Next by date: 24 Nov 2003 02:25:52 -0000 Re: new documentation license, Rodolfo J. Paiz
Previous in thread: 24 Nov 2003 02:25:52 -0000 Re: new documentation license, Andy Oram
Next in thread: 24 Nov 2003 02:25:52 -0000 Re: new documentation license, Rodolfo J. Paiz


  ©The Linux Documentation Project, 2014. Listserver maintained by dr Serge Victor on ibiblio.org servers. See current spam statz.