discuss: Proposal for revised license and license requirements.
Subject:
Re: Proposal for revised license and license requirements.
From:
"J. Greenlees" ####@####.####
Date:
5 Jun 2005 04:16:51 -0000
Message-Id: <42A27C9D.3000302@telus.net>
Alex Nordstrom wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 10:25, David Lawyer wrote:
>
>>I think our manifesto needs to be changed to require that any license
>>must allow modification if the author can't be located after searching
>>on the Internet.
>
>
> Wording a legally acceptable definition of what constitutes a reasonable
> effort and appropriate procedure for attempting to locate an author
> (and evidencing thereof) is a potential can of worms. It risks being
> perceived as too weak by protective authors or too dangerous by
> potential maintainers (or both).
>
> Also, what happens when this hypothetical clause is invoked? Does the
> new maintainer assume the original author's modification rights? Does
> he share them with the original author? Do the rights become
> non-exclusive?
new author has those rights, only on the parts of the document that they
have written.
this is a standard for co-operative works, I believe.
original author has all rights as originally stated on thier work.
>
> What happens when a document with such a license is created by several
> authors and some but not all are unreachable? What are the powers of
> the remaining author(s) to withhold rights or invoke the suggested
> clause?
>
generally, each contributor has copyright on the parts they contributed.
such a group should work out details for righte before submitting any
works. ( this helps tldp to track down correct person in case of
alteration requirement )
tldp should only reccommend such an agreement, not require this.
requirements for free contributions should be minimal, to promote
contributing.
