Subject: Re: DSSSL Documentation Project? From: David Megginson <dmeggins@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 06:44:27 -0400 |
Why not use the Free Software Foundation's GPL for all of the documentation? - it contains some useful legal text about not having a warrantee and about your limited liability (i.e. they've already payed the lawyers); - it allows you to designate a copyright holder (a GPL'd text or program is NOT public domain); and - it allows redistribution either for free or for profit (as long as no one tries to prevent other people from further redistributing it). For example, if someone else adds to your documentation and publishes the result, they will have to allow you (or anyone else) to distribute their enhanced version freely as well (this is not true of public domain texts). Furthermore, no matter who owns the copyright, they could not prevent you from, or charge you for reprinting part or all of the tutorial in your own book, as long as you included authorship and copyright details. Of course, a copyright has no validity if you're not willing to enforce it, so you could assign the copyright to Yuri's foundation, the Free Software Foundation, or anyone else who would be willing to go to court if necessary, or at least to send out nasty lawyer's letters. All the best, David -- David Megginson ak117@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Microstar Software Ltd. dmeggins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx University of Ottawa dmeggins@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.uottawa.ca/~dmeggins DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: DSSSL Documentation Project?, Tony Graham | Thread | Re: DSSSL Documentation Project?, Harvey Bingham |
Re: DD: Modularity guidelines, Frank Christoph | Date | jadetex update, Sebastian Rahtz |
Month |