Re: Licenses of Blog Posts
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:07:59PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Ana Guerrero Lopez <ana@debian.org> [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
> right.
>
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!
Ana
Reply to: