[Grok-dev] Re: license for docs
daniel.carraher at gmail.com
Wed Jan 30 15:59:29 EST 2008
Well, there's the matter of whether the ZPL is even legally applicable to
documentation instead of software and also in what jurisdictions.
ZPL 2.1 mentions source code, binaries, products, files... a not what I'd
>+1 for the ZPL, as it matches the software, *and* fits under the IP
>policy of the Zope Foundation, which is responsible for the hosting of
When I host my documents under a microsoft service do I have to license them
according to microsoft IP policy?
You could go all the way and force people to pass their copyright to the
Zope Foundation too, why don't you propose that? It would certainly make
things easier for the project.
Alas I was under the impression that grok.zope.org now redirects to the
quintagroup hosting, not zope hosting.
I'll be open to hear the benefits of using the ZPL for documentation.
If my documentation isn't welcome with whatever license I
choose at the end of the process, then go ahead and take it down I have no
problem with that.
Whether I'd bother to host it somewhere else is debatable though.
On Jan 30, 2008 1:34 PM, Tres Seaver <tseaver at palladion.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> daniel wrote:
> > Giving the authors of documentation a choice of licensing is a pretty
> > incentive to contribute. I'm not sure what the reason is to force new
> > contributions under a ZPL software license or even a GFD license.
> I don't know why anybody who wants to contribute to Grok would have a
> problem with any reasaonably open / free license: I think picking *one*
> such license for the site's content would be best. Folks who want to
> put their content under another license can host it elsewhere, and just
> make a link.
> +1 for the ZPL, as it matches the software, *and* fits under the IP
> policy of the Zope Foundation, which is responsible for the hosting of
> > I think creative commons is a great idea since they specialize in all
> > of documents and range from very permissive to non-commercial
> > Creative commons licenses as well as being for documents proper are also
> > easy to select <http://creativecommons.org/license/> and comprehend
> > they typically include an easy to understand non-legal-jargon
> > description<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/>with
> > links to the legal
> > code <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/legalcode>.
> > Another possible benefit is that Creative Commons licenses can be
> > by country easily while being selected. You can choose a USA version or
> > Brazil version or any other of their many options.
> - --
> Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver at palladion.com
> Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Grok-dev