[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: a desperate request for licence metadata (was Re: migrating w iki content from twiki (w.d.net) to moinmoin (w.d.org))

Hi, Andreas:

El Martes, 06 Septiembre 2005 18:20, Andreas Schuldei escribió:
> * Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com> [2005-09-06 17:39:06]:
> > Which I fail to understand, as the limited rights provided to me by
> > law should be sufficient for the wiki content in most cases.
> i spoke to a german lawyer about this exact (license) issue when
> skolelinux.de pondered an applicable license for it's wiki and
> aparently it is doubtfull that wiki content is worthy to protect
> in the first place. There needs to be a certain quality level
> reached, aparently, which is not necessarily given in a wiki.
> So this discussion about a license for the debian wiki might be
> very debianish but also irrelevant. (c:

No, I don't think it isn't.
Even if German laws renders not having a explicit license good enough for the 
case at hand, reality is copyright laws *tends* to "overprotect" the author 
"against" other (potential) users.  By explicitly saying what are the rights 
you give to your users you:
a) Make a case by the explicit announce it (so people can become aware that 
not everybody will give the same rigths with their works) and
b) Insure you are not dependant (to an extent, at least) on what's the 
"default" for any given country's laws about this item.

In Spain, for instance, not mentioning any explicit copyright notice gives 
complete control to the author and no control (except for reading it in the 
very media it originally was published) to the "user".

Think about it quite like a "portable programming" problem: everything that 
can be declared, should be declared in order not to be "catched" by the 
different defaults this or that compiler on this or that platform migth 

My two cents, you know.

Reply to: