On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Christopher Jones
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I wwould NOT like to see dual licensing. Aside from any likely
> legal issues
I think we're all interested in any potential legal issues that
licensing changes could bring. What additional legal issues would dual
(disjunctive) licensing pose ?
> it introduces unwarranted complexity with existing
> and new documentation.
Based on what I've read in previous emails in this thread, the
copyright of the manual and of all user-contributed code resets with a
single entity. If we take that as fact, then I see no legal hurdle to
us treating new and existing documentation separately.
Moving from a single license to a dual-licensing model does introduce
a small amount of complexity ('you may choose license A or B', instead
of just 'license A'), but I think that the overall benefits
(supporting code reuse, eschewing legal ambiguity, community
education, etc...) more than outweigh the addition of a tiny amount of
complexity to the license declaration.
--R
