>Alain: YES and no. There could be some bickering. A difference of
>opinion concerning the importance of the contribution made by someone
>that wishes to be cited as one of the authors.
Alain,
in that event we would have the list decide on what to do.
>Alain: The collective name would be much easier to deal with than a
>slew of different copyright holders for each distinct part of OC. Even
>if the recognition as a co-author were merely honorary, it might still
>be unruly to deal with so many names. In collective works, it is
>customary to cite the two principal authors followed by a snippet to
>indicate that there were other authors.
I think as everything will be under one OpenCard license it shouldn't be
much of a problem how many authors this have. Of course, when exceptions to
the rule are desired, we should have a central body, but I think in that
case we could just propose the licensing on the list and all owners who
care about what is done with what they wrote can intervene then.
>Alain: Agreed, but it might not be that easy to make this distinction
>because there is a whole range of possibilities between a substantial
>rewrite and a typo.
Again, I hope there'll be some sane judgement on the list, and in cases
where this lacks, we can decide on-list using votes.
>Alain: I suggest that the Copyright Holder's mail address be a mailing
>list that forwards mail to all members that are designated as Copyright
>Holders. Everyone gets notified, and the mailing list address and
>server are maintained by the group (forever current).
Trouble is, what if someone leaves OpenCard without leaving a new address?
We should make sure that we're not stalled then.
Cheers,
-- M. Uli Kusterer
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.weblayout.com/witness
'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...'
--- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: ---
Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html
Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
