[FM Discuss] Discuss Digest, Vol 39, Issue 27

Mon Aug 23 08:27:18 PDT 2010

hey

ok cool...my apologies again. i really dislike license discussions, at
the end of the day i think it just gets in the way...

anyways, glad to know all seems ok at your end and you didnt take too
much offense at my rambling ;)

adam

On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 08:23 -0700, Rebecca Hargrave Malamud wrote:
> Hi, Adam -
> 
> I like the dual-licensing scenario - I think that will work for our team.
> 
> Much of this is just the real-time education process taking its course - 
> neither artist were familiar with these licenses until last week.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Rebecca Malamud
> 
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 19:11:43 +0200
> > From: adam <adam at xs4all.nl>
> > To: discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
> > Subject: Re: [FM Discuss] Final Image Licensing for "E-Book
> > 	Enlightenment"
> > Message-ID: <1282324303.1728.319.camel at esetera>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > hey,
> >
> > Good work on the cover. Looks good :)
> >
> > as for the license issues....weeeeeell.....im sorry if I may appear
> > overly 'whatever' with regard to this question - its only because i dont
> > believe in copyright even though i know it exists, and i also dont think
> > there is any such thing as a 'free license' since none of them make
> > content 'free' they all act as jails for content in various ways.
> >
> > so...with that apology aside. i will try to answer your points in some
> > way which I hope meets your needs.
> >
> >
> >   
> >> 1. Can the images used on the cover have a different license than the 
> >> interior illustrations (let's say GPLII for the cover to support the 
> >> precedent at FLOSS Manuals, and perhaps Creative Commons cc by-nc-sa and 
> >> cc by-nc-nd on the interior)? We thought it might be interesting to link 
> >> to CC licenses within the text on the FM site if it is agreeable with 
> >> the author and the FM team.
> >>
> >>     
> >
> > so, NC is not free. and thats a bit of an ideological problem. Is there
> > really someone on your team that needs this NC? its really a horrible
> > license requirement and exists, in my opinion, only so that people who
> > dont understand what free is (ie. publishers) to feel like they are
> > being cool and free, when they arent. BY-SA, BY, or CC-O is better if
> > you want to use CC licenses. NC is a 'feel good' requirement which is
> > just smoke and mirrors.
> >
> > On the topic of CC - if its a show stopper for you to use GPL then by
> > all means use CC, however if you do this the content cannot be used by
> > any other existing manuals _including_ the current OLPC manuals which
> > are all GPL. I would prefer, if you want to go down this road, to dual
> > license with the GPL. That legally doesnt help actually, but we can at
> > least fudge it a bit and pretend we dont know the legal ramifications of
> > dual licensing material while copying the content 'in good faith'.
> >
> >   
> >> 2. Can the images be released as GPLII for the 72dpi/600px versions used 
> >> by FLOSS Manuals, yet something different for the full resolution 
> >> versions? What if the artist wanted to make a poster or something along 
> >> those lines with the full resolution images?
> >>
> >>     
> >
> > technically this is problematic, as in we dont have a technical way to
> > manage this. So I would have to say no we cant do it. But maybe i dont
> > get your point - I dont understand why you need the license to be
> > different inorder to make a poster from it...maybe you can explain that
> > a bit more.
> >
> >   
> >> 3. Will Booki support per-object licensing in the future, or will the 
> >> license always apply to the entire book?
> >>
> >>     
> >
> > well...you have to remember that per-object licensing is a nightmare.
> > That introduces all sorts of crazy scenarios - what objects can fit with
> > what objects? Ugh...I dont ever want to go down that path. Even dealing
> > with this on a per-chapter basis is pretty crazy and soon becomes
> > non-sensical and totally unmanageable.
> >
> > sorry, i dont mean to dismiss your question, i just cant see how we can
> > make this work and i really dont want to even think about it.
> >
> > our dev principles and our usability principles have been 'keep it
> > simple'. to do this we have to throw away a whole lot of complicated
> > problems and reduce them to a pragmatic working environment. hence we
> > license on a per-book basis. there might be some scope at a later date
> > to introduce per-chapter licensing but that is about as granular as i
> > would ever hope we would go. 
> >
> > on the other hand, what i would like to see in Booki is a nice way to
> > request that content be relicensed. Perhaps by clicking on the credits
> > list for a chapter and then a 'can i relicense this please' message gets
> > sent to the rights holder who can then reply personally or have
> > automated instant replies to specific requests (ie relicensing to
> > specific licences would auto respond with a 'yes' or 'no) 
> >
> > but thats another story...(although not entirely unrelated)
> >
> >   
> >> Many of these questions are raised out of the course of our internal 
> >> collaborative process (for instance, the artist has created images that 
> >> the book designer may not use, but we are still contemplating releasing 
> >> them through our RDC site).
> >>
> >> Rest assured, we have no shortage of creativity or curiosity at #rdcHQ! 
> >>   :-)
> >>
> >>     
> >
> > ok. I would hope you could communicate to everyone that their content is
> > important to others - let the world have access to it, and dont get too
> > caught up in license issues. Its not the point and it just stops good
> > content from getting to the people that want it...
> >
> > sorry again, i just cant take copyright and its ridiculous consequences
> > seriously....I hope you can convince your team to ease up a little on
> > the license issue and just go with what we currently use. keeping it
> > like this or dual licensing with CC would be the easiest way for all to
> > go
> >
> > adam
> >
> >
> >
> >   
> >> Thank you!
> >>
> >> Rebecca Malamud
> >> ---------------------------------------
> >> http://ruraldesigncollective.org 
> >> (KICKSTARTER funded as of 08/19 - YES!)
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Discuss mailing list
> >> Discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
> >> http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net
> >>     
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
> http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net