discuss: LDP Licence at http://tldp.org/COPYRIGHT.html, and changing in-place
Subject:
Re: LDP Licence at http://tldp.org/COPYRIGHT.html, and changing in-place
From:
David Lawyer ####@####.####
Date:
23 Dec 2003 09:06:50 -0000
Message-Id: <20031223090600.GD431@lafn.org>
On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 10:03:26AM -0800, Tabatha Marshall wrote:
> I'm still torn as to whether we should even adopt one of our own or use
> Creative Commons. Using our own is great, but how does that work when
> it comes time for enforcement? (I'm really asking - being an informal
> organization has its disadvantages, or maybe I'm worried for nothing.)
Being informal has a lot of advantages. For example, my church has
formal organization and they are much less efficient than LDP. Informal
organization often means that the ones doing the work who understand
what's really going on are also the ones that make decisions. And thus
the decisions are much better than in the case of formal organization.
I've seen this in my local LUG too.
[snip]
>
> Wouldn't it be easier to contact authors who are using one of the LDP
> licenses and ask them to convert to one of the others? (Of course, I'm
> not sure whether we can do that if the author is unreachable, but then
> that might say something about the overall quality of the document.)
Yes. But it's a lower priority than that of recruiting new authors. It
could be part of the review process. However, if we want them to change
out of LDPL we need to have a good alternative to suggest. That was
supposed to be GFDL which I never liked very well from the start. So I
support the idea of modifying one of LDP's licenses although I would
start with the "Boilerplate" one in the Manifesto. I would like to see
one with options, one such option being that it can only be modified by
anyone if the author can't be located.
David Lawyer
