License of the Ubuntu Book?

[adam hyde]

> > 
> 
> afaik gpl+CC-* are incompatible
> kk
> 

well...its unclear to me. I'm not a lawyer, but I imagine there is some
room for argument between what is 'similar' and what is 'compatible'...

infact the cc 3.0 license itself says: 

"you may distribute the resulting work only under the same, similar or a
compatible license"

...which itself suggests a difference between 'similar' and compatible'

...anyone know a friendly lawyer ;)...actually i really get annoyed at
this stupid license stuff. at the end of the day people want to easily
interchange content. instead those that try and do it right just end up
confused as to what they can and can't exchange and how

but still...we must push on..can anyone provide any clarity on this?

Specifically I am wondering:

Does the CC-BY-SA clause "you may distribute the resulting work only
under the same, similar or a compatible license" mean you can distribute
the same content under the GPL?

Personally, I suspect it does.

Maybe I will write to CC, but interested to know if anyone here can
clarify this as it directly effects Ubuntu docs content.

adam




> > 
> > adam
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, 2007-07-02 at 19:53 +1000, Jeremy Visser wrote:
> >> adam hyde wrote:
> >>> Why then does the copyright statement also state the material is 'all
> >>> rights reserved'? 
> >> Because the whole concept of free publication and open source is foreign
> >> to those publishers, who probably out of habit put "All Rights
> >> Reserved", because a free license is so uncommon for a book in print.
> >>
> 
> 
-- 
adam hyde
'free as in media'

~/.nl

http://www.flossmanuals.net
http://www.simpel.cc
http://www.radioqualia.net