Re: Booklet, version 7

Ingo Klöcker <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.kde.events
Message-ID <201102022201.42393__2838.61155990071$1296680566$gmane$org@thufir.ingo-kloecker.de>
On Wednesday 02 February 2011, Stuart Jarvis wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 February 2011 16:22:54 Felix Michel wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 02 February 2011 12:49:27 Felix Michel wrote:
> > > > the booklet is more or less ready for printing.
> > > 
> > > It's awesome :-) I have been watching a little, even though
> > > lacking the time to contribute.
> > > 
> > > > I just have to buy a usb
> > > > stick and then i will go to a copy shop.
> > > > 
> > > > The only thing missing is license part on the cover. For me it
> > > > is allright to publish the booklet under a CC license. I just
> > > > dont know how to put all this.
> > > 
> > > Legally*, I don't believe we can do this without the explicit
> > > permission of all contributors. Neither can we attribute
> > > copyright to KDE e.V. as on page 38 - I never transferred my
> > > copyright to KDE e.V. (though I would be happy to).
> > > 
> > > So, what are our options? Well, copyright is automatically with
> > > the creators in most countries, so making no mention of
> > > copyright at all does not mean that there is not any. We can add
> > > a notice later once we have full agreement. An alternative is
> > > 'Copyright 2011, contributors' particularly since they are
> > > listed on page 2.
> > 
> > Okay, just tell me what i should put on the left side of the cover.
> > I can put everything you want, just tell me.
> > 
> > What i think we need:
> > 
> > Copyright
> 
> 'Copyright 2011 Contributors '

That's useless. In this case you can simply leave it out.


> Seems most true to me (copyright notices are basically meaningless
> anyway and vague is ok - some Fedora stuff even says 'Copyright Red
> Hat and others')
> 
> > License
> 
> I favour not specifying a license right now. That means whoever picks
> it up has no rights and will have to contact us for permissions. Is
> that a problem? Copying a printed version is kinda rubbish anyway,
> better to have a proper licence on a downloadable version.

Yes, IMHO not specifying a license would be highly problematic.

One issue I have with this is that this might cause bad publicity 
because, effectively, we would be publishing the booklet under a non-
free license.

Another issue I have with this is that I would not be allowed to give a 
copy of the booklet (in electronic form or printed out) to anybody. All 
I could do is point others to the download link. That would be pretty 
lame.


Regards,
Ingo

 
_______________________________________________
This message is from the kde-promo mailing list.

Visit https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-promo to unsubscribe, set digest on or temporarily stop your subscription.
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 198 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAk1JxjUACgkQGnR+RTDgudghDACfasTArb7NE/lL48tOJoPVvcOl
QmIAoN2VTrUV1IFbBpEFH2NdgC9S3WHy
=Suqe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.