See comments in-line...
On 30/06/11 19:31, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 2:30 AM, Simon Cropper
<[email protected]> wrote:
Personally I have a problem with Project Overviews, or any technical
documentation for that matter, being locked up in Commercial-in-Confidence
derivatives. I think Project Overviews, which can be legitimately be
included 'as is' in a proposal or design document, shouldn't need to be
reworked. To me the reworked document, which needs to include your name as
original author, implies some sort of collaboration has occurred when none
has occurred. Yes, reworked documents do look better but contribute nothing
the the broader CC/FOSS/OSGeo community.
But this is my opinion. If you have one - for or against - *especially those
people that have authored the Project Overviews*, SPEAK UP!
Project overviews are so small that even if a restrictive license
would apply, you could still get away with copying it completely as
sort of citation. We are talking about 2-3 sentences and a list of
features, which -I guess- in many cases have been at least partly
copied and/or inspired from/by other sources often not noting any
license and therefore copyrighted - so if you are so strict about
licensing I'm not even sure we can publish them ourselves.
Historically sloppy practices regarding document preparation and
copyright should not influence solidifying clearer legally-compliant
procedures in the future.
Plagiarism is Plagiarism. I am sure if LISASoft or OSGeo Foundation was
taken to court for breach of contract they would not be so flippant.
This whole discussion is imho ridiculous: those who don't care about
licensing will copy from any source for their commercial proposals,
those who do (but given the general rush in which project proposals
usually are written I would doubt if there are many) might contact you
and/or share their changes.
True, so why don't we just cut to the chase. Lets require all Project
Overviews to be released to the public domain or as CC0. If the source
documents have been plagiarised and of dubious status, why bother.
If people are so complacent about copyright then why bother trying to
clarify the procedure anyway. Lets save Cameron and others a lot of
problem -- documents can be sourced from anywhere regardless of the
copyright, slapped together and re-released on the LiveDVD for anyone to
use in whatever manner they wish.
Disclaimer: I learned talking and writing English by copying sentences
from teachers, textbooks and other sources. I'm sorry if my sentences
contain copyrighted material.
I am not sure how this qualifies as a disclaimer. What you are saying
here is that copyright is not an issue for you.
It is painfully obvious to me that I am in the minority here on this
list, in the OSGeo Foundation and in the broader Open Source Community.
Sad, very sad.
--
Cheers Simon
Simon Cropper
Principal Consultant
Botanicus Australia Pty Ltd
PO Box 160, Sunshine, VIC
W: www.botanicusaustralia.com.au
_______________________________________________
Live-demo mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc
