Re: Pictures from the Skolelinux gathering in Bergen
On 2005-06-21 15:14 Øyvind A. Holm wrote:
On 2005-06-18 04:12:22 Patrick Willam wrote:
Øyvind A. Holm wrote:
http://musthave.sunbase.org/Skolelinux/
Probably unnecessary to say, but the images are GFDLed.
Your usage of this licence, especially for _pictures_, allows only two
conclusions for me:
a) you don't have understood the GNU FDL,
or
b) you don't care about the GNU FDL.
First of all thank you for not taking my comment being rude, because it
wasn't meant that way.
Well, IANAL, but I would say I have the understanding of both the GPL
and the GFDL ...
That lets me think you've at least read them. :-)
I've stumbled about some projects in the past where the the authors/
originators wanted the content to be 'free', and they used the GFDL
without even having read it!
Apart from the licence being complex (try to read and understand the
licence, esp. when I-Am-Not-A-Lawyer) and problematic by itself (see
http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.xhtml ) and in
addition to the fact that you can't just say "licence=GFDL", this is
why i get very alerted if i hear *debian* people something say which
sounds to me like: "hey, take it, its free, its GFDL".
...and think that the GPL is one of the greatest modern inventions.
full ACK
[.....] but I
suppose it's necessary to specify if there are any invariant sections,
front-cover texts, or back-cover texts.
The licence [for itself] (almost) only requires to list them when used.
But from the real life point of view it's necessary to _clarify_ if
you make or don't make use of them, because of differences in the
basics of continental-european versus anglo-american law systems.
> I asked RMS about this actual
topic when he visited Bergen (Norway) at 2004-09-19.¹
> ¹: http://musthave.sunbase.org/Stallman/stallman_bergen_20040919-2.mpeg
So you _are_ a concerned person. I very like concerned persons.
I said we had the GPL for software and GFDL for books ...
From the FSF side(!) of view the GGPL should be used for software and the
GFDL should be used for books.
But one can use whatever licence for anything, as long as it is
suitable a) for the thing to be licenced and b) for the person who
chooses the licence.
The GNU GPL is -- in its implications -- very specific about the process
of granting and receiving the mentioned rights, but really generic about
the things you can/can't use it for...
GNU GPL [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html]
| §0
| This License applies to any program or other work which contains a notice
| placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under the terms
| of this GPL. The "Program", below, refers to any such program or work, ...
"other work"!
| $1
| You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code
| as you receive it, in any medium, ...
...And in conjunction with [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html]
| Licenses For Works Besides Software and Documentation:
| (1) GNU General Public License
| The GNU GPL *can* be used for general data which is not software, as long
| as one can determine what the definition of "source code" refers to in the
| particular case.
The GNU GFDL has practically problematic implications which substantially
limit the use cases for it --- regarding how it can be used as well as for
what it can be used.
...and asked if there would be any GNU Media License for sound, film,
> pictures etc. He suggested to use the Creative Commons license for those
> kind of things, which sounds reasonable.
Sounds very reasonable for me too.
So if you have problems with using the GGPL for pictures, i'd like to vote
for the pics being licenced throug a CC licence. You don't have to remove
the GFDL, you can just add another licence (if you're the originator of
the pictures) -- but i think you know this already.
I'm not sure if it's the right thing to smack a GPL license on pictures
I don't know if it's "The Right Thing[tm]", too.
Using the GGPL for pictures is not usual, but does make no hassle and has
no strings attached to it.
It's definitely less problemtic than using the GFDL for pictures. ;-)
Sorry for being picky about this; i really think we're here on
_debian_-edu and not on _xyz_-edu. But there might be some wrong
expectations on my side.
It's a good thing people are picky about it — most of us could need to
be reminded about the importance of this.
Great to hear we're on the same side with this. :-)
Regards,
Øyvind A. Holm
Best regards,
Patrick Willam
--------------
#!/bin/bash
for f in 1 2 3; do [.....] done
_That's_ conveniance! ;-)
--
ring tone advertisement:
Send TTY0, TTY1 or TTY2 to 0800-SCO *now* and get a new cool login on your
mobile; needless to say all within the low priced monthly I.P. subscription.
-- from german version on heise.de-forum
Reply to: