Re: Licenses for DebConf6
[I tried to crosspost this between -legal and -devel, but apparently
it never arrived on -legal. Resending...]
Scripsit Francesco Poli <frx@winstonsmith.info>
> Don't you agree that seeing non-free or even undistributable (no license
> means "All Rights Reserved", with current laws!) papers at a DebConf is
> really a shame?
I don't.
Remember that non-free != evil, and that some of the arguments why
free software is a good thing do not apply to expositions of scholary
work or other conference contributions.
People who think that intellectual property is in and of itself an
evil concept are free to license their contributions liberally. But
on the other hand, people who like free software for pragmatic reasons
related to its being, well, software should not be forced to give away
more rights than practically necessary for making the conference work.
For example, it is common not to want to allow derived works for
conference papers. That does not conflict with the SC, because the
papers are not going to be part of our operating system.
--
Henning Makholm "I didn't even know you *could* kill chocolate ice-cream!"
Reply to: