Philip Olson wrote: > 2. Discuss with the authors and IBM about transferring copyright
You'll find this difficult, because there is no legal entity to which to transfer copyright. > The manual must not contain > copyrighted information from other parties and I am firm in this regard I think what you mean is that the manual must only contain content to which the PHP doc team *also* has copyright. There's plenty of material that belongs to others in the manual, but they have (implicitly) allowed that material to be used in the manual. > and already stated reasons why this is the case. Attribution yes, > copyright no. Again, what you really mean is that there cannot be material to which php-doc does not also have copyright. If you look at it in that light, there's really no reason why the other copyright holders can't also indicate that in the manual. Take a look in the PHP source; there's plenty of code in there that is copyrighted by others, but the content is under the PHP license. Translating that to the manual; the content is copyrighted by the authors, but the is under the OPL. Are your objections to copyright notices based on a legal notion, or on an aesthetic one? --Wez.
