Joe & Mario My sense of this is ....
1 - Joe, I doubt any of the stuff (i.e. Tiddler text like you see in blogs) you've encountered and want to recycle is in anyway problematic. WHY? The creator never thought to (c) it. If they had it would be likely the PAGE would gave a CLEAR copyright statement. 2 - Plugins do tend to have copyright terms. These get automatically transported when you install them. IN BRIEF ... I would not worry about it. Josiah On Wednesday, 26 December 2018 19:56:10 UTC+1, joearms wrote: > > Thanks Mario, > > that was good to know. > > What concerns me more are TWs I've found "in the wild" - can I quote from > them if I can't get permission from the author > and if there are no apparent rights in the TW file???? > > Cheers > > /Joe > > On Tuesday, 25 December 2018 15:14:32 UTC+1, PMario wrote: >> >> Hi Joe, >> >> Everything used from tiddlywiki.com is licensed, based on the following >> definitions from 2 CLAs >> >> see: https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/tree/master/licenses >> >> more specific for individuals: >> https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/blob/master/licenses/cla-individual.md#2-grant-of-rights >> >> >> TiddlyWiki *code* uses: BSD 3-cause >> TiddlyWiki *docs* uses: CC-BY >> >> Every contributor needs to sign the CLA prior to merging the >> pull-request. Signing the CLA is an "active" process. So it can't happen by >> accident. The list of contributors can be seen at the end of the CLA. >> >> Every plugin, that can be included with the TW plugin manager has to use >> the same licenses. >> >> 3rd party plguins should have their own licenses, which are completely up >> to the author. If a plugin itself uses external libraries, the used >> licenses can add up. >> >> see: >> https://wikilabs.github.io/editions/markdown-it/#%24%3A%2Fplugins%2Fwikilabs%2Fmarkdown-it >> >> ... where my plugin uses BSD 3-clause and the underlying library uses MIT. >> >> I personally don't include the license text. I include links only. ... >> Because for some of my plugins the license text would be bigger then the >> "real" plugin content. >> >> If licenses are defined within a VCS (version control system), it's easy >> to verify, which license was active at any given time. If 3rd party plugins >> are hosted, without VCS, it will be difficult, since the author can change >> the library text at any time. So the latest active plugin could have had a >> different license 2 years ago. >> >> I personally would *not* want to contribute to the "EDLs (Edit >> description lists)" because I consider it "bloat of metadata". I'm in favor >> of having an "audit-able" system, but it needs to come "naturally". So it >> has to be part of the underlying system, without the need to make the core >> more complicated. >> >> IMO a system with much potential for TiddlyWiki is the DAT-protocol and >> DAT-filesystem. see: DAT-project <https://datproject.org/> >> >> It uses a "copy on write" storage system, that is "naturally" versioned. >> So it's easy to create valid links to licenses, which also include the >> whole "prose text". ... >> >> just some thoughts. >> >> have fun! >> mario >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWikiDev" 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 https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/97373a26-2f23-46a6-a19a-e778a73734e4%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
