In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gervase Markham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It also seems that Creative Commons has the most momentum in this area, > and so there is likely to be more compatible text. Debian-legal found all the CC licenses non-free in the DFSG sense. http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/07/msg01193.html I'm not so concerned about Debian's willingness to distribute Mozilla developer and Web developer documentation. In fact, as long as the Mozilla Web Author FAQ is maintained by me and is publicly available from mozilla.org, I don't even want anyone to distribute stale copies. (With translations my biggest concern is whether the translations stay up-to-date.) Nonetheless, the Debian-legal post raises some valid-looking points about the attribution aspect of the licenses. The anti-DRM clause could be better as well. As for the pool of compatible text, I think it is problematic that the CC licenses do not contain a license version update clause and don't say anything about the compatibility of the localized licenses. It seems to me the localized versions of by-sa are all incompatible. Has CC responded to the findings of Debian-legal? Are the bugs going to be fixed? What happens to the works licensed under the 2.0 licenses if/when CC releases new revisions of licenses? (Cross-posting to .license, follow-ups there.) -- Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hsivonen.iki.fi/ Mozilla Web Author FAQ: http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html _______________________________________________ mozilla-documentation mailing list [email protected] http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-documentation
