I notice that the Open Information Definition material is on the lines of
the OSD -- a set of criteria for what constitutes an acceptable Open
Information License. Thank you for taking that approach.
The proposed Open Content License offers a specific model
(http://www.opencontent.org/openpub/). It has options which fail to satisfy
the OSD criteria (i.e., requiring additional permissions -- new licenses --
to make derivative works, and prohibition of commercial print publication).
At the same time, a number of their terms are nicely stated and very clear,
especially concerning artistic elements. I think a coordinated approach
that first obtains acceptable criteria (an OID) would be very valuable.
I recommend that the Open Source Writers Group (OSWG) also be consulted:
http://www.oswg.org/. They have a license definition that also allows
restriction of derivative works (but don't limit republication/distribution,
commercial or otherwise).
Because documents and data may often be packaged with or be part of a work
of software, I say it is important to honor the OSD criteria, extended to
the broader subject matter of documentation and information. Otherwise, I
fear that developers of derivative works become hamstrung (or at least gun
shy) when facing the incoherent constraints of licenses for different
elements of the overall work.
-- Dennis
------------------
Dennis E. Hamilton
InfoNuovo
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel. +1-206-779-9430 (gsm)
fax. +1-425-793-0283
http://www.infonuovo.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Cowan
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2000 07:56
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Open Information
[ ... ]
Consider coordinating your efforts with Open Content
(http://www.opencontent.org), which has an Open Content license.
