once again thanks for your input. We have changed the registration texts -
some nice formatting and checkup with the OPEN KNOWLEDGE FOUNDATION still
Just wanted to say, perhaps you would like to take another try :) - I am
really thankful for any comments!
Am Mittwoch, 20. Juni 2012, 18:17:21 schrieb Björn Balazs:
Am Dienstag, 19. Juni 2012, 02:11:27 schrieb Stefan Knorr:
Concerning my motivation: it is not marketing. I care about Free
I think this service is simply another peace we need to solve the big
Free- Software-Puzzle. It does happen to legally belong to a company and
it might make money (tm) but most importantly it follows and serves
Making money is always a laudable goal for a business. ;)
I simply wanted to make the point that this 'product' is not the way my
consultancy makes money. It is basically the result of my (mostly) voluntary
work in Free Software. As there was nothing out there, I decided to start a
new project, which I am OpenSourceing right now. To put it in the company
simply makes things (like handling money) easier for me.
What exactly is meant by "unless I stated something different before"?
that mean I can put proprietary data on UserWeave as long as I've
it elsewhere under a proprietary license before I joined UserWeave?
(I'm sure it doesn't, but given that this is a legally-binding
this phrase should be worded differently or taken out altogether.)
There is a potential long term business model (tm). The idea: people
want to use the service can pay for not having their data released and
published. This money shall be used to to finace the development and
hosting of the software under the best of Free Softwares principles. But
it will always be free of charge for projects working in the open. So
this "state"ment is meant to refer to this potential business model. I
will have to think about rephrasing it. I have been talking to some open
knowledge foundation guys before, perhaps they can help.
Please do think about rephrasing it. For instance, if we upload (other
people's) icons there, this will create a huge licensing issue for us.
It can be hard to track down everyone who's worked on an icon and it
will be even harder to convince them to relicense their icons "just" for
Maybe you could ask for people to use an "OSI-approved open source
license"/"GNU-approved free license" instead and just default to CC-by?
Thanks for pointing me to this misunderstanding. I actually do not want to
affect the license of things that get tested (e.g. Icons). People uploading
them should be aware that they need to have the right to use them. The whole
licensing issue should only affect things that get actually produced on
UserWeave, like surveys, personas etc.
So sorry for the misunderstanding here. As it is FreeSoftware and I am not
really the best person for legal stuff - anyone around with a good idea how
to get this right?
Hope that clarifies it all a bit!
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy