Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2010 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 17:31 +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
You should have license and author, and derive it via ODF processing
  and not enter it with a simple CCK field. Moreover, it should be
  investigated what kind of commitment the Document Foundation took
  towards Richard Stallman about "nonfree add-ons", see 

Hi Andrea,

Well, that is how the OO.o team did it, reading the license out of the
properties of the template - but I'm not so sure that is the right way
to do it.

I use the templates from time to time and have been burned twice by that
little feature - cause if you forget to remove it then the document you
create retains the original license, but in the case of work for hire it
can not and the final document does not relate any longer to the
templates license as far as I an concerned - although other may
disagree. I would really like to hear your and other's thoughts on that

As for the FSF/ R.S. opinions - not everyone agrees with them as I am
sure you are aware.



E-mail to for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


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.