Perhaps people could comment on the following proposition -- if an organisation is Not for Profit, its dealings are therefore Noncommercial?
I think the problem is Python has historically been so very free-- It has always been *extremely* Business-Friendly, and totally lacks ... ah, the moral opposition to how a closed-source business wants to run their own lives. :) Consider this: my company is makes a product written mostly in Python. It's commercial and closed-source. If content from the papers ended up in the python documentation website, it might just end up in the Python docs themselves.... And I distribute python for commercial purposes :) As do a lot of people... therefore, everything in the python distribution-- code, docs, etc-- has to be able to be distributed for commercial purposes. I am SO not a lawyer. But remember, the Python-developers and Python.org are not the only people who "distribute" Python and what's in it... I do too. Others do too. So nothing can end up in Python that I can't freely distribute. That's not to say they couldn't link to your content and not-include it in any downloads or anything. Then it'd be available to anyone on-the-website and such. Also it's not saying you SHOULD change your license. I don't know if a journal and its articles would be the kind of thing that WOULD make it into core-Python-documentation in general... It's articles-- possibly interesting and useful ones, but docs tend to be more referency... and if it would make it into the docs? You can always relicense anything you hold :) --Ix
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
