> Well I missed a few days of email, and I was a tad offended by the
> implication that I wrote the USB Guide / HOWTO for my personal benefit.
Crossed wires here. The quote in question is on the Programming Guide, not
the user guide. (http://usb.in.tum.de/usbdoc/). Im not sure who got that
mixed up. If it was me originally I apologise.
In terms of licenses:
http://opencontent.org/opl.shtml is the opencontent license. It allows people
to copy it and to modify it, as well as to distribute modified versions.
Modified versions must clearly say they are modified.
The GNU project have a documentation license now which is fairly similar. THere
is an article about that at http://www.linuxmall.com/news/features/000324fdl
and the license itself is at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html
Finally people also often add clauses like
'You may not reproduce this content in a form that has an ISBN or an ISSN'
(ISBN/ISSN being book classifications). That means someone wanting to put
your material in a book has to actually ask your permission and potentially
pay for the privilege.
Finally the perl documentation license Tom Christiansen uses forbids any
modifications unless he approves them.
Thats sort of a range of examples.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
