discuss: HOWTO in the wiki
Subject:
Re: [discuss] HOWTO in the wiki
From:
Rick Moen ####@####.####
Date:
14 Nov 2008 19:47:34 +0000
Message-Id: <20081114194634.GO30874@linuxmafia.com>
Quoting Jean-Daniel Dodin ####@####.####
> Given these HOWTOs *are* in the tldp collection, I think we can
> assume we can publish then verbatim :-) (I know, even this can be
> challenged, but I think we can live with this one).
That falls into the category of "implied licence". If you think about
it, you'll realise why it's a settled point of law that, when you
provide a copyrighted work to a medium that customarily distributes it
in a particular way, you are implying permission to distribute _your_
work in that way. For example, an author who posts a particularly
creative essay to Usenet or a mailing list gives implicit permission to
distribute that essay to Usenet news spools / newsreader software around
the world or to mailing list subscribers (respectively), and cannot
prevail if he/she subsequently decides those people were not entitled to
have copies.
So, because HOWTO contributors knew that LDP puts up contributed HOWTOs
in various places on its Web sites and mirrors, those contributors could
not prevail in court over "publishing them verbatim" being supposed
copyright violation.
That, therefore, is one thing LDP does that absolutely is _not_ even
technical copyright violation for any HOWTO, regardless of licensing.
Continuing my point from yesterday, it's an interesting exercise to
watch what people are doing around you during a typical day, and spot
all the arguable torts that occur. It turns out, it's just about
impossible to live a normal life without committing a minor series of
civil wrongs (torts) against people: Every time someone has (arguably)
been denied a legal right or (arguably) failed a legal obligation, that
could be a lawsuit. Any time a retail customer thinks a product isn't
as good as the seller claimed, for example, that's an arguable tort.
Yet, most such matters get simply dealt with. People and companies work
things out: broken contracts, failure to comply with deadlines, etc.
And of course the main lesson is that many torts aren't worth worrying
about, and some are a lot more serious than others. That certainly
includes copyright violations.
