[tex-live] License auditing: Consequences

[Sebastian Rahtz]

Karl Berry wrote:
>     do what you want with the doc, but acknowledge source,
>     and the same licence must be used on derivatives. 
>
> Runs into the same problems as the GFDL when trying to share text
> between code and manual.
>   
yes, you may be right at that.
>     I would say that CC is that. it has the same virtue as the GPL,
>
> My whole problem with "CC" is shown by this sentence.  There *is* no one
> CC.  There are tons of licenses promulgated by CC, all with very similar
> names.  Some are free, some aren't.  I've given up trying to make sense
> of it.  It's one of the worst cases of confusing license proliferation
> I've run across.
>   
That's not very fair. They started out on day one saying that
they would draw up a small number of separate licences,
and they have stuck to it. They are not all free, but that
was not a criterion for them.
>     that its widely used and understood, 
>
> Ok, in your part of the world it's widely used and understood -- not in
> mine :).
>   
you don't use Flickr?

-- 
Sebastian Rahtz      

Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431

OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service
http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk