Steve Litt wrote:
On Friday 16 June 2006 11:50 am, David Neeley wrote:
Finally, I do believe that if you wish to be covered, the wiki should
have a copyright statement something like:
"Files submitted to the wiki for general download are covered by the
XXX license in the name of their respective author, unless specified
otherwise by the contributing authors."
That sounds good.
I would suggest something like the BSD license as the basic one, so
there are no real limitations or questions about use--commercial or
otherwise--but giving the contributor the option of choosing another
one if he or she desires. That way, if the files can be copyrighted,
they would be covered in all cases.
That also sounds good, at least for most stuff, including what I emailed a
couple days ago. If it were something I worked 60 hours on I might go GPL to
prevent a Microsoft Kerberos type situation, but my layout files aren't that
type of work.
I've been reading about this some more. It turns out to be a very
complex legal issue, especially regarding fonts, which do not have
the same legal status as layout files.
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~pfs/essay2.html
Though I think your copyright rights, if they are weak, will
extend to whoever tries to steal your "work". If they can get
away with stealing yours, then someone can steal from them too.
Also obtaining a license for some fonts doesn't give you the
same rights to use those fonts as if you had bought them.
