Re: Licenses of Blog Posts
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:07:59PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Ana Guerrero Lopez <email@example.com> [130523 21:27]:
> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 08:44:57PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> > > I think the requirement of the last paragraph is missing with the
> > > lastest blog post "Debian GNU/Hurd 2013 released!" on bits.debian.org.
> > The post was also published by its main author at:
> > http://www.debian.org/ports/hurd/hurd-news.en.html
> > And everything published in the website is under the MIT license, same
> > than everything published in bits.d.o by default.
> > But since the above link is rather unknown to people, I added the link
> > to the Hurd new item that was everywhere in the press to avoid people
> > complaining about us copying from there without the license stuff, etc.
> > Looks like no matter what was done people was going to raise issues anyway :)
> For that claim to be true, you have to find someone that would have had issues
> if you wrote "This article appeared originally at GNU Hurd news and it's
> available under the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later
> version and under the <a href="http://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/mit">MIT (Expat)
> License</a> via <a href="http://www.debian.org/ports/hurd/hurd-news.en.html">News about Debian GNU/Hurd</a>".
> Licenses are an important matter for Debian. It's important to get them
Thanks. And one of the great things in Debian is we have people who look at
this and tell others when something is not fully right!