Frank Hecker escribió: > [Standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.] > > Speaking personally, whatever original documentation you write yourself > is your own; you hold the copyright, and you can license it however you > please. In particular, you're free to license it under CC-BY-SA in one > context and the Mozilla MPL/GPL/LGPL tri-license on the other. > (...) > If you're modifying existing content in files that are tri-licensed then > your resulting files are (as you indicated) derivative works and should > be licensed under the same license. If you're creating new sections > within an existing help file then from the point of view of the MPL your > contributions would be Modifications and the resulting file should be > licensed under the MPL; ditto for the GPL and LGPL, so if the file was > tri-licensed originally your revised version should be tri-licensed as > well. However you're also free to take your new sections (assuming > they're not based on pre-existing material) and license them under > CC-BY-SA as well, in other contexts. (For example, if you post them to > the MDC site or whatever.) > (...) > It doesn't really matter where you put the new content originally, all > that matters is that it be original content.
Thank you, it perfectly matches my thoughts (new files, I can do whatever with them; new content on existing files, I can do whatever with the new content only; modifications on existing files, are derivative works and thus subject to MPL/GPL/LGPL). I guess the only issue now is that you and me are not lawyers and we both could still be wrong. :-) Thanks again. _______________________________________________ legal mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/legal
