Janet M. Swisher wrote:
Daniel Carrera wrote:
Jonathon Blake wrote:
One of the issues with the PDL, is that we don't know what constitutes
a change that has to be listed.
So how does this proposal avoid us from having to track those changes?
You can make a document, and later decide to license it under the PDL
as "original documentation". Because it's "original documentation"
you don't need to list a history of changes.
Now say you and your friends make a few changes to the document
without using the PDL. You publish a new version, and let people use
this new version as a new "original documentation". So you don't have
the burden of posting all the changes that you made between the two
versions.
This is what we would be doing.
Reminder: I am not a lawyer.
I want to make sure I understand this, so I'm going to try to put it
into my own words. Please let me know whether my understanding matches
what you've got in mind.
OOoAuthors will license all documents under the PDL as "original
documentation". Even updates to existing documents will be considered
"original documentation", not a "modification" of an existing
document. This is because the people making the updates (OOoAuthors
members) will do so under one of the other licenses available (GPL or
CC). The only case in which someone has the burden of tracking
"modifications" is if they choose to accept it under only the PDL, and
they decide to make and publish changes on their own.
For example, suppose I decide to rebrand OpenOffice.org as
"JanetOffice", and I want to use the OOoAuthor-produced guides (most
of which I didn't write), and I choose the PDL as the license under
which I do that. In that case, I would have to include a notice that
"I changed 'OpenOffice.org' to 'JanetOffice' throughout this guide".
However, if I chose the GPL or the CC license to govern my use of the
guides, I would have to do comply with whatever they say about
modifications, which I don't remember except that it's less onerous.
In short, it sounds like you're saying that publishing as PDL
"original documentation", combined with the other license options,
provides an "escape" whereby we don't have to track modifications for
the PDL.
Is that correct?
Also how does this effect content we still have by authors no longer
active? Do we have to find the authors again and go through the entire,
"I agree" process again for the PDL so the content can be used by OOo?
- Re: [authors] Re: License proposal: Question Linda
-
