Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Wiki page : https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_print_magazine_proposal
Hi, I'm quite looking forward to seeing the revised proposal tomorrow from LPM :-) Has LPM come back to us yet? TTFN Paul -- Sie können mich aufreizen und wirklich heiß machen! signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Wiki page : https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_print_magazine_proposal
Hi, I've not edited the page as I'd like the fedora-legal people's perspective on this. Hmm, ok. Here's my thoughts: * Some of the content will be written/created by LPM (possibly all of the content). Accordingly, I don't think we get much say in how they use it, aside from the normal trademark usage considerations. I'd have thought that we (Fedora people) would be in a better position to write about F12 than LPM. As it is advertising Fedora, I think Fedora should have more say in what is done with it. * For anything that Fedora owns, we should be sure it is available under acceptable licensing terms, but for things like screenshots, I doubt there is much concern, as that sort of thing is rather ubiquitous. You'd think that - I know some companies hate screenshots being taken and frequently mock up rather than show production... * I think ultimately, if Fedora contributors end up authoring content for this magazine, they should do so under licensing terms that they are comfortable with, but I don't think it is necessary to mandate it. Here I'd disagree. While for software, folks are happy for anyone to use it as they like. However, for written work, people become protective. It is better have something which says by contributing this piece, you are giving Fedora to publish once and republish once by any means. That way the author knows exactly what terms they are contributing by. I know it's not ideal, but this is publishing and to paraphrase and old (and long gone) editor friend, you live and die by the words you use. TTFN Paul -- Sie können mich aufreizen und wirklich heiß machen! signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Wiki page : https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_print_magazine_proposal
On 09/04/2009 02:51 PM, Paul wrote: Here I'd disagree. While for software, folks are happy for anyone to use it as they like. However, for written work, people become protective. It is better have something which says by contributing this piece, you are giving Fedora to publish once and republish once by any means. That way the author knows exactly what terms they are contributing by. I'm torn here. I want to believe that protective authors will be intelligent enough to set licensing terms for their copyrighted works. Also, I don't want to say these are the terms under which you give us these works, because then those protective people just complain and moan about how they're either too restrictive or too permissive. My instinct is to say that the contributing authors have to tell us the license under which we can use their contributions. Alternately, we could use unlicensed contributions of articles under the CLA, which allows us an extremely permissive license. Also, I'm not sure that LPM will be okay with using material under CC-BY-SA, for example (which is Free). If I had to guess, I'd say they would want something with the Non Commercial restriction (and a specific exclusion for them). But lets keep in mind that as far as I know, it is not clear where the content for this magazine will come from. Mel, maybe you can shed some light here? ~spot ___ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
