incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Frank Peters <frank.thomas.pet...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: Wiki for the project - wiki.services.openoffice.org provenance
Date Wed, 15 Jun 2011 05:01:28 GMT
> Agreed where Oracle has the exclusive copyright.  My only concern is
> that those other-license pages might not be under Oracle copyright
> and we will need to find out.

As I mentioned in the reply to Thorsten's mail, according to
the copyright page, Oracle co-owns the copyright to all wiki
content, unless you dispute the validity of that statement as such.

> I don't know the state of affairs, and was only raising a caution  flag

And rightly so.

 > -- another matter to check into.

Frank

> - Dennis
>
> PS: I am working to break myself of the convenient but misleading
> term, "relicensing," since only the owner of the copyright can set
> license terms and offer multiple (non-exclusive) licenses.  There is
> no downstream "relicensing."  What happens is more nuanced and
> relicensing appears not to be an appropriate term.
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Frank Peters
> [mailto:frank.thomas.peters@googlemail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 14,
> 2011 13:09 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Wiki for the
> project - wiki.services.openoffice.org provenance
>
>
>> What caught my eye was the statement that some material was under
>> special licensing and you'd have to notice that on an
>> individual-page basis.
>
> That is indeed the case and the licensing situation on the wiki has
> traditionally been awkward. But couldn't Oracle remedy this by (as
> copyright holder) relicensing the content under AL like done with the
> source?
>
> Frank
>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Greg Stein
>> [mailto:gstein@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 10:51 To:
>> ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Wiki for the project -
>> wiki.services.openoffice.org provenance
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 13:37, Frank Peters
>> <frank.thomas.peters@googlemail.com>   wrote:
>>> Am 14.06.2011 18:05, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton:
>>>>
>>>> There are two pages that caught my attention immediately on
>>>> visiting http://wiki.services.openoffice.org.
>>>>
>>>> There is this one:
>>>> <http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org_Wiki:Copyrights>.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>>>>
And that leads to this interesting one:
>>>> <http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Authors_licensing_declaration>.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>>>>
None of those are what I would call permissive.
>>>
>>> The question is whether Oracle as copyright holder actually
>>> donates the contents of the wiki under ASL (or any document
>>> equivalent of it) as well. Same holds for the website content.
>>
>> There is an ASLv1.0 and ASLv1.1. There is an ALv2.
>>
>> The "S" was dropped in order to apply it to documentation :-)
>>
>> If Oracle owns the copyright to any or all of the wiki content,
>> then they can place it under our standard Software Grant, and we
>> can license as we choose (ALv2 or (say) one of the CC licenses).
>>
>> Cheers, -g
>>
>


Mime
View raw message