Is Bazaar's document distributed under GPL?

[David Muir]

Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
> Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>  
>   
>>>  Would we want CC-BY rather than CC-BY-SA?  The only case advanced
>>>  so far is "so people can make non-free derivatives, specifically
>>>  training manuals."  Having people make site-specific training is
>>>  important and worthwhile.
>>>       
>> This is not a problem, as you point out.  The problem occurs when a
>> third party wants to make proprietary training materials that can be
>> used in a consulting context.  Whether that's a concern or not is up
>> to you.
>>     
>
> Proprietary training materials should not be cutting straight from
> GPL'd code/docs.  That's not different than writing code. I don't
> think anything needs to be done to accomodate that.
>
> [I was once contracted to write a proprietary training course on
> Python, and although the Python license is not GPL, I still wouldn't
> have considered using code from the distribution, including docs.
> Besides, none of it was written in the "voice" I would have used anyway.]
>
>
>   

The issue for the most part is whether someone can quote the manual in 
proprietary training material. Since the GPL allows for "fair use", I'm 
assuming that training material containing quotes from Bazaar 
documentation would not have to licensed as GPL. Is this a fair assessment?

David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20090922/ed59bc93/attachment-0002.htm