Non-free documentation [was: Re: Ubuntu Traffic #11 -- 2004/11/05]

[Thomas Hofer]

Benj. Mako Hill wrote: [Saturday 13 November 2004 06:46]
> Ubuntu Traffic is a newsletter summarizing the goings-on in the
> Ubuntu community -- focusing on IRC and mailing list activity.

First I'd like to say that UT and other, unrelated "Traffics" are very 
useful services that give great insight into the various projects, even 
to a casual observer.

The footer of the Ubuntu Traffic page says: "Ubuntu Traffic is created 
and produced by Canonical Ltd. All pages are copyright Canonical."

I'm a bit disappointed that the UT is non-free - in contrast to the very 
similar looking project "Kernel Traffic", which is licensed under the 
GPL.

I guess that UT is made by paid employees of Canonical, unlike the other 
Traffics, which are created by unpaid volunteers. So it's 
understandable and perfectly alright that Canonical wants to retain 
exclusive redistribution rights. I'm disappointed only because it makes 
me wonder if Canonical's commitment to free and open source software 
extends to documentation and things like the bug database as well.

To summarize my observations and questions:

1. At least *some* documentation created by Ubunutu is non-free.
2. Who owns the bug database? Can I mirror/fork it?
3. Do I retain the copyright over my contributions when I edit the Wiki?
4. The Wiki as a whole seems to be non-free - I can't find any licensing 
information beside of Canonical's copyright notice. A non-free wiki is 
an absolutely no-go for me.

To say it blunt: When I work free of charge, I want to commit my energy 
only to projects that can be forked anytime, completely and without 
disruption. I think Debian is such a project. Its openness is what made 
Ubuntu possible. Ubuntu seems to be very close to this ideal, and I'm 
excited about it, because I had wished for a long time that such an 
addition to the strong, slow moving Debian base would exist. I hope 
someone can provide me with some real facts about Ubuntu's licencing in 
order to turn my slightly sceptical excitement into complete bliss. ;-)

Regards,
Thomas.