Licencing of Documentation

[George Deka]

Lu,
That works for me.

But i do think having a standard would be good, so the GFDL in Mark's
opinion  meets the ubuntu licence policy.

Question: What if we had a modified GFDL without the invariant
sections ? maybe call it the UFDL ?

George




On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:49:23 +0000, Louise McCance-Price
<lu at canonical.com> wrote:
> Hi guys
> 
> Sorry - I didn't catch you, George, before you turned in.
> 
> There has been much discussion and I think this will work for everyone.
> 
> Mark is keen for it to be GFDL, but this will not be forced.
> 
> The creator of the document can choose what license they wish to use.
> Derived works will remain under the license of the originator.
> 
> all best
> Lu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> George Deka wrote:
> 
> >both the GFDL and the CC Attribution are considered non-DFSG compatablile.
> >I think the GFDL meets the OSSF guidlines on free.
> >The reason why these two licences are not considered free is mainly
> >due to the attribution requirment being so strict, in that it must be
> >attributed in the same manner as the original. There are also other
> >issues with the CC ASA licence.
> >the debian-legal ML has had alot of discussion on these, there is also
> >a debian-legal wiki that coveres the debian position on these
> >licences.
> >The issue here is what free standard does ubuntu use DFSG or OSSF.
> >
> >George
> >
> >
> >On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:03:47 +0800, Arun Bhanu <arun at codemovers.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>On 23:05 Tue 09 Nov     , Sivan Green wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Tue, 2004-11-09 at 20:41 +0100, Enrico Zini wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 06:17:21PM +0000, Louise McCance-Price wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>I said I'd find out about the licensing of documentation.
> >>>>>It appears the winner is:    GFDL
> >>>>>let me know your thoughts on this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>Two questions:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1) GFDL documentation cannot currently go into Debian main.  Is there a
> >>>>    reason why GFDL has been chosen even if it has this problem?
> >>>>
> >>>> 2) (more practical) do we track invariant sections in the wiki, or we
> >>>>    say that wiki pages shouldn't have invariant sections except when
> >>>>    approved by someone/some group?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>I must join enrico on this, Lulu maybe you have an idea?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>How about using Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike[1] license?
> >>
> >>        [1] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>Arun...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>ubuntu-doc mailing list
> >>ubuntu-doc at lists.ubuntu.com
> >>http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-doc
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 


-- 
<a href="http://spreadfirefox.com/community/?q=affiliates&id=82&t=1">Get
Firefox!</a>