Hi Rob, On Sep 7, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Dennis, >> >> I am under impression that the license for everything on OOo is PDL, yet >> almost nothing fulfills the terms. >> >> Copyrights are with the Initial Writer. If I can find an Initial Writer I >> will mark it - pretty much only in <META> tags although that is whose OOo >> back in 2000/2002 created or changed the page or some lists in some places. >> >> As far as copyright where there is no identified Initial Writer should we: >> >> (1) Have no copyright. >> (2) Put the ASF copyright in place. >> (3) Put an Oracle copyright on it. >> (4) Put an OpenOffice.org copyright on it. >> >> We can't do (3) we're not Oracle. We should stop doing (2). >> >> Unless there is an argument in one direction or another I'll do (1) by Lazy >> Consensus. >> > > What does it mean to "do (1)"? Are you saying to remove the notice in > the appendix? No, I am not touching the PDL license. I mean that on pages where I cannot find a filled an initial writer to acknowledge with their copyright, I will have no copyright, not even the Apache copyright. If we cannot ascertain the copyright holder then no copyright exists. That's where I am now. > > >> I recommend that as we replace pages with AOOo policies that we create >> mdtext replacements as fresh files. Regards, Dave >> >> On Sep 7, 2011, at 4:11 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: >> >>> Dave, >>> >>> It would seem that these (few, I believe we're told) can be handled the >>> same as unclear provenance anywhere in the code base and its dependencies. >>> >>> The ideal time to clean these up would be when the site is under the >>> OpenOffice.org domain name but actually hosted on Apache infrastructure. >>> That gives complete ability to make all of the adjustments that are needed, >>> including the numerous minor ones to connect to the Bugzilla, etc. >>> >>> I'm not clear how migration of the wiki is impacted, unless you mean the >>> proposed movement of material now on static web pages into the wiki? >> >> That is my concern. Kay will need to assure that we know which wiki pages >> came in as "PDL" as I think they'll need to stay that way. >> >>> >>> Exactly where are you finding these PDL license notices? The first one I >>> found was on the "Open Office.org 3 Installation Guide", a PDF (or ODT) >>> reachable from <http://download.openoffice.org/common/instructions.html>. >>> If we *don't touch it* can't it be retained until a permissively-licenses >>> alternative is needed? I don't see a reason to be concerned that the >>> authors/contributors did not properly execute the instructions of the >>> license they have offered. >> >> That's not the concern, the concern is if StarOffice, Sun, and/or Oracle >> lost the paperwork. I suppose should we be presented with a copy of the PDL >> from an Initial Writer then we fix the issue. >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >>> >>> - Dennis >>> >>> RELAXED RETAIN, SUPPLEMENT, AND REPLACE SCENARIO >>> >>> If the notices are always in standalone documents such as the Installation >>> Guide, I don't see any problem making them available the same way they are >>> now. They should simply be left intact. They can be replaced by >>> non-derivative replacements later, when there are Apache OOo releases that >>> require different information. I don't see why we have to hurry. >>> Instructions for existing releases remain valuable to keep around. I >>> suggest preserving them right where they are, where people expect to find >>> them. >>> >>> When there are releases from Apache OOo, supplementary documents could be >>> offered. That would be another way to provide specific information >>> applicable to later releases. I see considerable time before these >>> PDL-licensed documents need to be supplanted. They might be retained for a >>> very long time. >>> >>> >>> - Dennis >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 14:33 >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: Concerns about all PDL website material >>> >>> >>> On Sep 7, 2011, at 2:16 PM, Rob Weir wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> I am stuck on a licensing issue with the OpenOffice.org website and I >>>>> begin to doubt if can do much with it other than rehost and correct >>>>> obvious changes in policy. >>>>> >>>>> Please look at http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/PDL.html >>>>> >>>>> (Whether the PDL is category A for Apache is a follow up, but there is no >>>>> point without resolving the following.) >>>>> >>>>> Specifically look at: >>>>> >>>>>> Required Notices. >>>>>> You must duplicate the notice in the Appendix in each file of the >>>>>> Documentation. If it is not possible to put such notice in a particular >>>>>> Documentation file due to its structure, then You must include such >>>>>> notice in a location (such as a relevant directory) where a reader would >>>>>> be likely to look for such a notice, for example, via a hyperlink in >>>>>> each file of the Documentation that takes the reader to a page that >>>>>> describes the origin and ownership of the Documentation. If You created >>>>>> one or more Modification(s) You may add your name as a Contributor to >>>>>> the notice described in the Appendix. >>>>>> You must also duplicate this License in any Documentation file (or with >>>>>> a hyperlink in each file of the Documentation) where You describe >>>>>> recipients' rights or ownership rights. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> and >>>>> >>>>>> Appendix >>>>>> Public Documentation License Notice >>>>>> The contents of this Documentation are subject to the Public >>>>>> Documentation License Version 1.0 (the "License"); you may only use this >>>>>> Documentation if you comply with the terms of this License. A copy of >>>>>> the License is available at __________________[Insert hyperlink]. >>>>>> The Original Documentation is _________________. The Initial Writer of >>>>>> the Original Documentation is ___________ Copyright (C)_________[Insert >>>>>> year(s)]. All Rights Reserved. (Initial Writer >>>>>> contact(s):________________[Insert hyperlink/alias]). >>>>>> Contributor(s): ______________________________________. >>>>>> Portions created by ______ are Copyright (C)_________[Insert year(s)]. >>>>>> All Rights Reserved. (Contributor contact(s):________________[Insert >>>>>> hyperlink/alias]). >>>>>> NOTE: The text of this Appendix may differ slightly from the text of the >>>>>> notices in the files of the Original Documentation. You should use the >>>>>> text of this Appendixrather than the text found in the Original >>>>>> Documentation for Your Modifications. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Does it ever actually require that someone fill in the blanks in the >>>> Appendix? I see that it requires one to duplicate the notice in the >>>> appendix. And it permits (but does not require) initial writers and >>>> contributors to add their names to the Appendix. >>> >>> If no one seems to ever provide this information then what can we assume? >>> If there is no Initial Writer then who holds the copyright? Where's the >>> paperwork? Where does that leave us? Square one on the website and anything >>> derived from PDL? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> >>>> >>>>> I can find no answer to the question about who are the initial writers >>>>> and further contributors are for all most all web pages. There are some >>>>> that have meta tags, but that is not following the terms. >>>>> >>>>> Can anyone provide help here? Do most pages have an "INitial Writer" and >>>>> "Contributor" of Oracle Corporation? >>>>> >>>>> Would we need to see if the archives from prior to the kenai migration >>>>> have enough history to determine "Initial Writers" and "Contributors"? >>>>> >>>>> Where are these appendices? >>>>> >>>>> I don't see any point in working on the OOo website or transfers to MWiki >>>>> or CWiki without clarification. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Dave >>> >> >>
