[tex-live] License auditing: Consequences
sebastian.rahtz at oucs.ox.ac.uk
Wed Sep 6 23:05:34 CEST 2006
Karl Berry wrote:
> do what you want with the doc, but acknowledge source,
> and the same licence must be used on derivatives.
> Runs into the same problems as the GFDL when trying to share text
> between code and manual.
yes, you may be right at that.
> I would say that CC is that. it has the same virtue as the GPL,
> My whole problem with "CC" is shown by this sentence. There *is* no one
> CC. There are tons of licenses promulgated by CC, all with very similar
> names. Some are free, some aren't. I've given up trying to make sense
> of it. It's one of the worst cases of confusing license proliferation
> I've run across.
That's not very fair. They started out on day one saying that
they would draw up a small number of separate licences,
and they have stuck to it. They are not all free, but that
was not a criterion for them.
> that its widely used and understood,
> Ok, in your part of the world it's widely used and understood -- not in
> mine :).
you don't use Flickr?
Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service
More information about the tex-live