Community docs: license and copyright?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Community docs: license and copyright?

Uli Fouquet
Hi there,

I noticed that the copyright and license links in the community docs do
not work. We might want to discuss what should be presented there.

Contrary to the Zope repository stuff we're not bound to the "Zope
Foundation and Contributors" copyright holder with the community docs.
So, is it okay to say the copyright is owned by "Grok Community and
Contributors"?

For the license it is similar. As we're not bound to ZPL (for the
community docs), we could make everything for instance
CreativeCommons-licensed. Would that be an option? And if so: which one
of the various CCs would fit best? Or are there better options?

Best regards,

--
Uli


_______________________________________________
Grok-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/grok-dev

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Community docs: license and copyright?

Sebastian Ware
This is probably what we want (allowing commercial derivatives, which might be useful if someone is writing a book):



Attribution-ShareAlike
CC BY-SA

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work even for commercial purposes, as long as they credit you and license their new creations under the identical terms. This license is often compared to “copyleft” free and open source software licenses. All new works based on yours will carry the same license, so any derivatives will also allow commercial use. This is the license used by Wikipedia, and is recommended for materials that would benefit from incorporating content from Wikipedia and similarly licensed projects.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0

Mvh Sebastian


11 jan 2011 kl. 11.26 skrev Uli Fouquet:

> Hi there,
>
> I noticed that the copyright and license links in the community docs do
> not work. We might want to discuss what should be presented there.
>
> Contrary to the Zope repository stuff we're not bound to the "Zope
> Foundation and Contributors" copyright holder with the community docs.
> So, is it okay to say the copyright is owned by "Grok Community and
> Contributors"?
>
> For the license it is similar. As we're not bound to ZPL (for the
> community docs), we could make everything for instance
> CreativeCommons-licensed. Would that be an option? And if so: which one
> of the various CCs would fit best? Or are there better options?
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> Uli
>
> _______________________________________________
> Grok-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/grok-dev

_______________________________________________
Grok-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/grok-dev

88x31.png (6K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Community docs: license and copyright?

Uli Fouquet
Hi Sebastian,

Am Dienstag, den 11.01.2011, 17:43 +0100 schrieb Sebastian Ware:

> This is probably what we want (allowing commercial derivatives, which
> might be useful if someone is writing a book):
>
> Attribution-ShareAlike
> CC BY-SA

Sounds good, thanks for looking into this! Any objections to use CC
BY-SA from now on?

Best regards,

--
Uli


_______________________________________________
Grok-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/grok-dev

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Community docs: license and copyright?

Souheil CHELFOUH
Uli, thank you for raising the problem !
And yes, this is fine to me, as Sebastian suggested.
I think it's a good licence for this purpose.
Let's see what the others say.

2011/1/11 Uli Fouquet <[hidden email]>:

> Hi Sebastian,
>
> Am Dienstag, den 11.01.2011, 17:43 +0100 schrieb Sebastian Ware:
>
>> This is probably what we want (allowing commercial derivatives, which
>> might be useful if someone is writing a book):
>>
>> Attribution-ShareAlike
>> CC BY-SA
>
> Sounds good, thanks for looking into this! Any objections to use CC
> BY-SA from now on?
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> Uli
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Grok-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/grok-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
Grok-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/grok-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Community docs: license and copyright?

Roger Erens-2
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 23:38, Souheil CHELFOUH <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Uli, thank you for raising the problem !
> And yes, this is fine to me, as Sebastian suggested.
> I think it's a good licence for this purpose.
> Let's see what the others say.
>
> 2011/1/11 Uli Fouquet <[hidden email]>:
>> Hi Sebastian,
>>
>> Am Dienstag, den 11.01.2011, 17:43 +0100 schrieb Sebastian Ware:
>>
>>> This is probably what we want (allowing commercial derivatives, which
>>> might be useful if someone is writing a book):
>>>
>>> Attribution-ShareAlike
>>> CC BY-SA
>>
>> Sounds good, thanks for looking into this! Any objections to use CC
>> BY-SA from now on?
>>

Maybe ask Carlos de la Guardia if he would have written his book when
the documentation would have had this license (presuming he used some
of the site's documentations). Wouldn't he rather have opted for the
CC-BY license?

Cheers,

Roger
_______________________________________________
Grok-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/grok-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Community docs: license and copyright?

Uli Fouquet
Hi Roger,

Roger Erens wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 23:38, Souheil CHELFOUH <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Uli, thank you for raising the problem !
> > And yes, this is fine to me, as Sebastian suggested.
> > I think it's a good licence for this purpose.
> > Let's see what the others say.
> >
> > 2011/1/11 Uli Fouquet <[hidden email]>:
> >> Hi Sebastian,
> >>
> >> Am Dienstag, den 11.01.2011, 17:43 +0100 schrieb Sebastian Ware:
> >>
> >>> This is probably what we want (allowing commercial derivatives, which
> >>> might be useful if someone is writing a book):
> >>>
> >>> Attribution-ShareAlike
> >>> CC BY-SA
> >>
> >> Sounds good, thanks for looking into this! Any objections to use CC
> >> BY-SA from now on?
> >>
>
> Maybe ask Carlos de la Guardia if he would have written his book when
> the documentation would have had this license (presuming he used some
> of the site's documentations). Wouldn't he rather have opted for the
> CC-BY license?
This is a good point.

@Carlos, if you read this, could you tell about your opinion in this
matter?

Overall I could imagine that picking single pieces of the docs for books
like the one Carlos wrote, is "fair-use". So, the use-case Sebastian
talks about is probably more the "web-book" case where you can build
nearly a complete book by extending the given sources a bit. Maybe
something like

  http://www.djangobook.com

which was realeased under the more restrictive GNU Free Documentation
License (and might be a good example of where we might want to go with
the docs in terms of structure, etc.; it simply looks quite professional
and usable).

Then, I think our main goal is to keep our docs as open as possible for
the benefit of users (our main audience target, I think) and
contributors in the first place. This also means that we might want to
protect our work from being pulled into the "more restrictive fields" of
copyright.

Beside this, it is certainly always possible to give away copies that
are licensed differently if some author really needs this for his or her
book-to-be.

Best regards,

--
Uli


_______________________________________________
Grok-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/grok-dev

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Community docs: license and copyright?

Vincent Fretin
Hi,

I agree with CC BY-SA.
My Plone training is under this licence.
http://docs.ecreall.com

Vincent

_______________________________________________
Grok-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/grok-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Community docs: license and copyright?

Martijn Faassen-2
In reply to this post by Uli Fouquet
Hey,

Thanks for bringing this up! CC BY-SA sounds fine to me.

Regards,

Martijn



_______________________________________________
Grok-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/grok-dev