Differences between revisions 6 and 10 (spanning 4 versions)
Revision 6 as of 2008-08-14 04:36:01
Size: 4192
Editor: FranklinPiat
Comment: minor stuffs.
Revision 10 as of 2008-08-15 02:41:17
Size: 6938
Editor: FranklinPiat
Comment: Q to d-legal : Can PD work be integrated in [GPL|BSD|.*] ?
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 10: Line 10:
 * As opposed to usual coduments, wiki pages are usually made of lots of tiny contribution. Therefore the traditional notion of ''author'' probably doesn't apply as usually.
 * Right to delete stuffs.
 * As opposed to usual documents, wiki pages are usually made of lots of tiny contribution. Therefore the traditional notion of ''author'' probably doesn't apply as usually.
 * Content should be moved to official material (website, packages, etc..). Preserving the history of contribution (Attributing the work) on the new repository isn't (always) possible.
 *
Right to delete stuffs (actually, this is more an internal rule issue than a license issue).
Line 14: Line 15:
This section lists the desired features for the new license.
 * Allow redistribution (in various medias : packages, cd, pdf, etc...) : '''Yes'''.
 * Preserve the license on copies : '''Yes'''.
 * Allow modification by others (add and remove) : '''Yes'''.
 * Allow derivative works : '''Yes'''.

''This table summarize the desired features for the new license.''

|| ||<-5:> License ||
|| ||[#PD] ||[#CC0]||[#BSD]||[#MIT]||[#GFDL]||
||[#Redistribution] || (./) || || (./) || (./) || (./) ||
||[#Allow_Modification] || (./) || || (./) || (./) || (./) ||
||[#Allow Derivative] || (./) || || (./) || (./) || (./) ||
||[#Allow commercial] || (./) || || (./) || (./) || (./) ||
||Attribution || ?? || || Y || :-) || :-( ||
||[#Share_Alike] || || || (./) || (./) || (./) ||

[[Anchor(Redistribution)]]
 Redistribution :: Allow to redistribute the content in various forms (raw, html, pdf, encrypted...) and on various media (packages, cd). This feature is '''Required'''.

[[Anchor(Allow_Modification)]]
 Allow Modification :: Allow modification by others (add and remove). This feature is '''Required'''.

[[Anchor(Allow_Derivative)]]
 Allow derivative works :: Allow Debian derivative distribution to use the document. Allow to reuse content in package Documentation, etc. This feature is '''Required'''.

[[Anchor(Allow_Commercial)]]
 Allow commercial use :: Allow commercial Debian derivative to reuse the material.

[[Anchor(Attribution)]]
 Attribution / Give credits : Not required ''or'' '''_not_ wanted'''.
 * Even thought we actually want to give credits / attribute a work to it's original author, I believe it isn't possible to __guarantee__ that all work attribution will be preserved over time. Furthermore, the actual name of the author isn't always known). Finally the number of contributors for a given page can make it .

[[Anchor(Share_Alike)]]
 Share Alike :: Preserve the license on copies. This feature is '''Required''', except for [#PD PD] where it doesn't apply.

-
Line 20: Line 49:
 * Attribution : '''_not_ wanted''' (Even thought we actually want to attribute the work to their original author, I believe it isn't possible to __guarantee__ that all work attribution will be preserved over time. Furthermore, the actual name of the author isn't always known)
Line 47: Line 76:
Line 50: Line 78:
[[Anchor(cc0)]]
=== CC0 Waiver ===
Creative Common's [http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/zero/1.0/ CC0 Waiver] ~-([http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CCZero wiki]; [http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/7919 Press-release])-~ is a protocol that enables people to either assert that a work has no legal restrictions attached to it or waive any rights associated with a work so it has no legal restrictions attached to it ~-(quote )-~.

Notes :
 * Basically, CC0 is meant to be a world-wide Public Domain.
 * CC0 is currently (2008-08) a draft, but rumors says that it should be released by the end of the year.

## Implementation: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0_Implementations
Line 51: Line 88:
 * Licenses For Documentation ~-[[BR]] http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#DocumentationLicenses-~
 * OSI Licenses ~-[[BR]] http://www.opensource.org/licenses/category -~
 * Licenses For Documentation [[BR]]~-. [http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#DocumentationLicenses]-~
 * OSI Licenses~-[[BR]]. [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/category]-~
Line 58: Line 95:
 * [http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page#footer fsf.org wiki] is under []  * [http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page#footer fsf.org wiki] is under [http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html GFDL]


== Question for Debian-legal ==
 * Does [#PD] and [CC0] actually allows to reuse some content in a work in a different License (In order to implement that work in any existing documentation).

== Implementation ideas ==
 * The front page should state the default license.
 * On change-commit, the license should be displayed.
 * The [:DebianWiki/EditorGuide:EditorGuide] :
  * Should link to "default license page".
  * Should state that specific license are only accepted in specific, exceptional and justified cases. Otherwise, the content will removed from the wiki.

This page is an overview for choosing a new license for wiki.debian.org.

  • ?TableOfContents(2)

wiki specific constraints

  • As opposed to usual documents, wiki pages are usually made of lots of tiny contribution. Therefore the traditional notion of author probably doesn't apply as usually.

  • Content should be moved to official material (website, packages, etc..). Preserving the history of contribution (Attributing the work) on the new repository isn't (always) possible.
  • Right to delete stuffs (actually, this is more an internal rule issue than a license issue).

Desired features

This table summarize the desired features for the new license.

License

[#PD]

[#CC0]

[#BSD]

[#MIT]

[#GFDL]

[#Redistribution]

(./)

(./)

(./)

(./)

[#Allow_Modification]

(./)

(./)

(./)

(./)

[#Allow Derivative]

(./)

(./)

(./)

(./)

[#Allow commercial]

(./)

(./)

(./)

(./)

Attribution

??

Y

:-)

:-(

[#Share_Alike]

(./)

(./)

(./)

?Anchor(Redistribution)

Redistribution

Allow to redistribute the content in various forms (raw, html, pdf, encrypted...) and on various media (packages, cd). This feature is Required.

?Anchor(Allow_Modification)

Allow Modification

Allow modification by others (add and remove). This feature is Required.

?Anchor(Allow_Derivative)

Allow derivative works

Allow Debian derivative distribution to use the document. Allow to reuse content in package Documentation, etc. This feature is Required.

?Anchor(Allow_Commercial)

Allow commercial use
Allow commercial Debian derivative to reuse the material.

?Anchor(Attribution)

  • Attribution / Give credits : Not required or _not_ wanted.

  • Even thought we actually want to give credits / attribute a work to it's original author, I believe it isn't possible to guarantee that all work attribution will be preserved over time. Furthermore, the actual name of the author isn't always known). Finally the number of contributors for a given page can make it .

?Anchor(Share_Alike)

Share Alike

Preserve the license on copies. This feature is Required, except for [#PD PD] where it doesn't apply.

-

  • Mix / Merge with other documents (with same or compatible license) : Yes.

  • Allow commercial uses of your work ??? (probably yes : Debian has commercial derivatives. We don't want to prevent those derivatives from providing a package that contains a copy of the wiki).

Proposed licenses

Here are some proposed licenses for the wiki.

?Anchor(GFDL)

GFDL 1.2

[http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/fdl.html GFDL] 1.2 License ([wiki:DFSGLicenses Debian DFSG], [wiki:GNU_Free_Documentation_License Wikipedia])

Attribution :
The GFDL really focus on attribution, which is a feature we don't want that much.

?Anchor(MIT)

MIT

[http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php MIT] License ([wiki:DFSGLicenses Debian DFSG], [wiki:MIT_License Wikipedia])

Attribution enforced :

Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders> [..] The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies However it also says or substantial portions of the Software.

?Anchor(BSD)

BSD

[http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php BSD] License ([http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-doc-license.html FreeBSD] copy, [wiki:?DFSGLicenses# Debian DFSG], [wiki:BSD_licenses Wikipedia]).

Attribution enforced :

Copyright (c) <YEAR>, <OWNER> ; All rights reserved. [..] Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

?Anchor(public-domain)

Public Domain

Public domain interpretation : [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/ Creative Commons], [wiki:Public_domain Wikipedia].

Implicit public domain don't allow duplication :

[..] The distribution of many types of Internet postings (particularly Usenet articles and messages sent to electronic mailing lists) inherently involves duplication. The act of posting such a work can therefore be taken to imply consent to a certain amount of copying, as dictated by the technical details of the manner of distribution. However, it does not imply total waiver of copyright.([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain#.28Almost.29_everything_written_down_is_copyrighted wikipedia]).

?Anchor(cc0)

CC0 Waiver

Creative Common's [http://staging.creativecommons.org/licenses/zero/1.0/ CC0 Waiver] ([http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CCZero wiki]; [http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/7919 Press-release]) is a protocol that enables people to either assert that a work has no legal restrictions attached to it or waive any rights associated with a work so it has no legal restrictions attached to it (quote ).

Notes :

  • Basically, CC0 is meant to be a world-wide Public Domain.
  • CC0 is currently (2008-08) a draft, but rumors says that it should be released by the end of the year.

See also:

Sample wiki licenses

  • Does [#PD] and [CC0] actually allows to reuse some content in a work in a different License (In order to implement that work in any existing documentation).

Implementation ideas

  • The front page should state the default license.
  • On change-commit, the license should be displayed.
  • The [:DebianWiki/EditorGuide:?EditorGuide] :

    • Should link to "default license page".
    • Should state that specific license are only accepted in specific, exceptional and justified cases. Otherwise, the content will removed from the wiki.