Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 13168 invoked by uid 500); 20 May 2002 15:56:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 13157 invoked from network); 20 May 2002 15:56:59 -0000 Message-ID: <3CE91CB9.5030306@apache.org> Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:56:41 -0400 From: "Andrew C. Oliver" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0rc2) Gecko/20020510 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Subject: Re: [LAW] Quick Lesson in Copyright Law (was RE: copyright for docs [was: Re: [Bugs] URLSource]) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > > >> >> Absolutely. We should assume that if the documentation was submitted >> for inclusion in CVS, that those documents are donated to the ASF. We >> do need a disclosure page (as you noted) that specifically says that. >> Therefore, no author can retain their right to extract royalties from >> their documentation if it is available freely on the Cocoon web site. > > > Then, in effect, the copyright terms for docs will be stricter than > the revised copyright terms proposed for code, as per Stefano's email, > which stated "GPL code can use Apache code". In other words, why > wouldn't we want a potential GPL project to "use" (revise, > distribute) Apache docs, as long as the project makes such > modifications available? Why should docs be treated differently than > code under Stefano's new proposal? Umm...no. IANAL....but... to my understanding, as explained GPL project could use revise, distribute Apache docs. They're be released under APL. The difference being depending on the benevolence of many individuals or the ASF itself. For instance, currently, any docs I have donated that I feel I still hold the rights to I could suddenly decide all projects that distribute them (GPL or not) need to pay me a nickle a copy (where copy is defined as a unique copy of my documentation on any location on a hard drive. I could require the ASF, you and anyone else who downloaded Cocoon and has a copy to play me for my documentation work. If the ASF owns the rights and presumably chooses to license it for free under the APL then the public's rights are protected. GPL projects can use it to their misguided goal of making all software GPL and you could use it without fear (presuming you trust the ASF ;-) )...etc. -Andy PS Keep your nickles ;-) > > Diana > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org > For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org