discuss: new documentation license
Subject:
Re: new documentation license
From:
Mary Gardiner ####@####.####
Date:
24 Nov 2003 06:16:23 -0000
Message-Id: <20031124061613.GE4880@titus.home.puzzling.org>
On Sun, Nov 23, 2003, Tabatha Marshall wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-11-23 at 17:47, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:
> > At 00:07 11/23/2003, David Lawyer wrote:
> > > It would prohibit advertising being displayed online with the documents
> >
> > Why on Earth would you want that provision? If I put such a clause in my
> > license, then the LDP gets a sponsor for banners on the site, then
> > automatically the LDP cannot use my document. And hey, what if I have a
> > copy of the HOWTO on my site (which I do) and then to pay for hosting fees
> > I decide to put a banner on each page? Why is this a bad thing? (And hey...
> > why is it anybody's business?)
>
> Hi Rodolfo. Honestly, from a Linux user perspective (reviewer hat is
> OFF), I am not crazy about advertisements in HOWTOs. I can totally
> understand if an author wants to profit from his work, but then I have
> to ask myself why they bother submitting to the LDP if someone's trying
> to make a buck off the work, since the collection is considered free.
>
> I'm not trying to start a debate on whether it's acceptable or not to
> put ads in HOWTOs. What I will say though is in almost 2 years of
> reviewing LDP docs, I've only run across one author who has done it.
I thought the discussion was more about trying to prevent this
situation:
- I submit my document to the LDP -- it has no advertisements in it
- because my document is freely distributable/republishable, it is put
up on example.com/howto/
- example.com places a banner ad at the top of my document
That's other people putting advertisements on a page/site with my howto,
other people profiting from my howto.
Like David, I have no particular objection to this (and restricting
advertising will make the licence non-Free, I think, and I'm intending
to licence my own in-progress howto freely, regardless of whether this
makes it unacceptable for the LDP).
-Mary
