Jim Winstead wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 12:50:26AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 03:29:31PM +0800, Jim Winstead wrote:
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 11:55:30PM +0100, Hojtsy Gabor wrote:
> > > >> Do we use chapters/copyright.xml for anything? I don't see where...
> > > >> Maybe we can remove it... This is far not actual and the copyright of
> > > >> PHP not the doc, so it musnt be there I think...
> > > > Don't remove them. Otherwise I will send you may lawyer. Only
> > > > discussions on a switch to the Open Public Documentatian are allowed
> > > > here.
> > > woah, take a pill.
> > > chapters/copyright.xml is an out-of-date copyright notice for php itself.
> > > the documentation's copyright notice is in bookinfo.xml.
> > > i don't see where chapters/copyright.xml gets included in the generated
> > > documentation, actually, but i could easily be overlooking it.
> > I haven't checked Hojtsy' removal. What I ment to say was, we need a legal
> > notice. A Open Public Documentation license would be better.
URLs:
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html
http://opencontent.org/openpub/
> > With the GPL people all over the world can make money with old PDFs. If
> > you understand the GPL this would result in, stop the documentation team,
> > we have the rights to distribute it.
> i can't parse that second sentence.
They have the rights to control their derivative works... the GPL doesn't
cover publication, only "copying, distribution and modification" of
"the Program". Most PHP books have not only the bulk of the XML files
"converted", I wouldn't be too surprised if I found our collective
typo's converted as well... :-)
Point being: Once they modify the non-Program information (by printing and
publishing docs), they own the whole shebang. The legal issue is how the GNU GPL
ideas (which pertain mostly to code) translate to printed matter (which has
different rules). They *can* claim ownership of the printed version of
the manual, in some ways, as the only documentation really protected by the
GNU GPL is the GPL itself.
This is why there is the GFDL, GNU's documentation license.
> > Have you had a look at amazon or barns and nobles? You can buy there the
> > PHP manual in two parts.
> cool!
> (but maybe you're trying to imply this is a bad thing?)
I think it's good that it's avaiable in printed, bound, form.
I think it's bad if somebody tries to sue us because they now "own
copyright on printed versions", and we don't own it somehow.
-Ronabop
--
Personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 520-326-6109, http://www.opus1.com/ron/
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 520-546-8993, http://www.pnsinc.com/
The opinions expressed in this email are not necessarily those of myself,
my employers, or any of the other little voices in my head.
