Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index


Le 25/11/11 21:25, Jean Weber a écrit :


Hi Jean,

1) The OOo version of the existing chapters has not been published,
and I understand that Dan Lewis is writing the LO version and OOo
version in parallel. Therefore IMO the copyright page does not need
the Acknowledgements section stating "This chapter is based upon..."
with the list of contributors to the OOo chapter; all of those
contributors should instead be listed in the Contributors section of
both books and the Acks section removed.

2) As this book is unpublished, IMO it is a "new" document and could
be licensed under Apache and CC-BY-SA as I suggested in a previous
note... as long as all contributors agree. I believe we can contact


From a copyright law standpoint, if the work can be downloaded, then it
has already been made available to the public - which under copyright
law is sufficient to be considered as "publishing" in some
jurisdictions. It can not then become a "new" document simply because it
has gone from public draft to "public final". Your understanding or
interpretation of the word "published" as I appear to understand it
seems to equate more to "documentation team approved release".

For example, the public can already access and download Base related
documentation here :

http://media.libreoffice.org/cmis/browser/English/Documentation/Base%20Guide/Draft

The licenses of these documents, unless stated otherwise therein, are
CC-BY-SA, in order to be in agreement with the terms of use of the TDF
infrastructure.

Note that I'm not against the approach, merely pointing out what I see
as a flaw in the reasoning based on the underlying tenets of copyright law.

If the documentation project really wanted to keep this as "unpublished"
(i.e. not made available to the public), then it would have to hide
access to the drafts and proofed stages of the site under the
media.libreoffice.org address, and have some kind of binding agreement
for the contributors of the documentation agreement that would oblige
them to recognise a work as being made available only when it attained
the status "published". As you will probably appreciate, this would
probably attract a fair deal of criticism, possibly be fairly complex to
set in motion, and would probably deter many from participating (who
would want to sign up to something like that, especially for something
they do mainly in their spare time?)


Alex




-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/documentation/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: 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.