Hi Jed, TLDR; I think there is no big problem. ... Just add a License tiddler to your resume edition.
The details follow :) On Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 9:03:01 PM UTC+2, Jed Carty wrote: > > Working on the resume builder edition has made me think about tiddlywiki > and licensing in the context of an extensible single page application. From > what I have seen none of the existing software licenses cover the cases of > a plugin architecture in a single page application. > That's not really true. If you have a look at the TW5 CLA license section: https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/blob/master/licenses/cla-individual.md#2-grant-of-rights, there are some parts the may be interesting. For tiddlywiki.com we already use 2 different types of license for the TiddlyWiki core and the TW content. see: Outbound License <https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/blob/master/licenses/cla-individual.md#23-outbound-license> - the core is BSD - the content is CC-BY So while on tiddlywiki.com, this is not stated (which imo need sot be changed), every user that contributes to TW and signed the CLA creates TW content with CC-BY. For most current plugins the authors seem to be at least comfortable with > the idea of their work being free software > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software>, I think this is a good > thing and, if a license is needed, I want plugins I make to have a > permissive license. > Every TW plugin can have there own license: https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/blob/master/licenses/cla-individual.md#27-3rd-party-libraries-and-plugins This license can be seen in the ControlPanel: Plugins section. If you click the ">" more icon with the library, you should see at least a "readme" and / or a "license" tab. (just checked it at tw.com, where we need to fix it :) The plugin author can set the license, to what ever they want. ... Where MIT and BSD and some CC licenses are easy to handle for us. For plugins everything else may cause problems depending on the use case. The problem as I see it comes in when you consider that TiddlyWiki can be > used to make creative works where there should be some distinction between > tiddlywiki as the container and the content created. The license currently > says > > Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without > modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: > Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this > list of conditions and the following disclaimer. > Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, > this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation > and/or other materials provided with the distribution. > For TW, imo redistribution in source and binary format are kind of the same, since HTML is source and binary format at the same time. If you open tiddlywiki.com and *"right click": View Source*, you will see, that at the very top you get the TW BSD core license. .... So If you don't remove this section by hand from the HTML file, you are good to go. As I wrote above. Every plugin, has its own section to display the license. <- You as the creator of your edition have to take care, that you don't use plugins and 3rd party libraries, that don't fit your usecase. ... So if you want to use your content commercially, you need to be sure, that the plugins you use allow you, to do so. ... For most of our existing stuff, this is no problem. ..... atm. IMO most library authors are very responsive to licensing feedback. ... So if something doesn't fit your needs, just ask them. See: http://visjs.org/blog.html - *A look back on vis.js* from January ..... They added MIT license after we informed them, about our problem, with the existing license. <https://github.com/almende/vis/issues/285#issuecomment-62022109> > which, as far as the TiddlyWiki core itself is concerned is a good thing > in my opinion. But in the case of the resume builder, since tiddlywiki is a > single page application, the license would apply to the content (your > esume) as well which is probably not a desirable situation. > That's right but imo no problem. .. Just add a License tiddler to your Resume, that says, what you want. > For the resume builder this isn't really a problem because it would most > likely be used offline and the output would presumably be a pdf which > wouldn't be subject to the same license, but for something like the > interactive fiction engine I made there isn't any way using the currently > available software licenses to make a distinction between the tool and a > game that someone makes using the tool. I would like TiddlyWiki to be > usable as an authoring tool for creative content, and I would like the > authors of that content to be able to use their work in a commercial > context, but unless some distinction is made between tiddlywiki and content > created using tiddlywiki than that isn't practical. > IMO also no problem. ... If you want every tiddler can have its own license field (may be images). This may be overkill, but possible. ... You just need to take care, that your plugins have the right licenses. I think that it would make sense in terms of creative control to be able to > distinguish between the tiddlywiki core, plugins, and wiki content for the > purposes of licensing. > IMO we do this already. See my other comments. > This also comes up because, while I don't think that it really grants or > removes any user rights compared to those given by the tiddlywiki license, > I would like to give the content of the wiki reference wiki a creative > commons license just so there isn't any question about people being able to > use or copy what I put on it. > As I wrote. Just add a License tiddler with some content like this: (just a suggestion) The content of this edition is licensed: eg: CC-BY-SA <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/> TiddlyWiki core is BSD licensed <https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/blob/master/licenses/copyright.md> Additional Plugin Licenses can be found at the [[Control Panel|$:/ ControlPanel]] (For the TW core, the license tab is missing atm. IMO I'll create an issue for this. but the link to github should be fine. ) > I don't think that we have anyone who is familiar with the legal issues > surrounding this, but if anyone does know I would be interested to hear > about if separating the different parts of tiddlywiki like this would be > possible. > I'm not a Lawyer, so everything that I wrote may be wrong. The system that we used to create the TW CLA is: Project Harmony - http://www.harmonyagreements.org/ The system I use to create CC licenses is: http://creativecommons.org/choose/ There is a github issue discussion about our CLA <https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues/1695> and may be future changes. But I think we have pretty solid system atm. > I wrote some other thoughts about this and the problems making a > distinction between the different parts of tiddlywiki here > <http://inmysocks.tiddlyspot.com/#Thoughts%20about%20TiddlyWiki%20and%20Licensing> > . > I can't access the link. hope that helps mario -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/d0205471-b0f9-4bba-89ef-efa67399401b%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
