[FM Discuss] License question

[helen varley jamieson]

it is a bit strange that there aren't more options in the list when you 
create a manual, especially as there are a lot more options in the 
"export" section.

surely the fact that a variety of CC licence options exist is a good 
enough reason to make them available?

h : )

On 17/04/11 9:41 PM, Walter van Holst wrote:
> On 4/17/11 9:05 PM, John Curwood wrote:
>> Hi Walter,
>>
>> There has been a lot of thought and discussion around what licence FLOSS
>> Manuals creations should use, the reasons why GPL was chosen and why it
>> does work with documentation are outlined in chapter 3 of the FLOSS
>> Manuals manual
>> (http://www.flossmanuals.net/floss-manuals/ch003_free-documentation).
>
> A cursory read does not provide an explanation. The GPL is a software 
> license, and is generally considered not to be appropriate for 
> non-software. Ah CC-SA does effectively the same, but is also better 
> suited for documents. The documentation mentions a few drawbacks of 
> the FDL, which I think are right. The CC licenses are not mentioned at 
> all.
>
>> I'm not sure if the licence can be set to anything other than CC0 and
>> GPL, but if it possible it would have to be done by and administrator
>> and there would need to be good reasons made for making the change.
>
> I would consider the inappropriateness of the GPL for anything else 
> but software a perfectly good reason.
>
> Regards,
>
>  Walter
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
> http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net
>


-- 
____________________________________________________________

helen varley jamieson: creative catalyst
helen at creative-catalyst.com
http://www.creative-catalyst.com
http://www.avatarbodycollision.org
http://www.upstage.org.nz
____________________________________________________________