changing content licenses (OPL => CC BY SA)

Zach Oglesby oglesbyzm at gmail.com
Thu Jun 25 15:32:15 UTC 2009


On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 11:24:13AM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
> On 06/25/2009 08:37 AM, Chris Tyler wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 18:58 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
> >> The Docs Team has recently reached consensus to change licenses that
> >> cover the various full-size guides the team works on, such as the
> >> Release Notes and the Installation Guide.  Currently the works are
> >> under the OPL 1.0, and the intention is to switch to the CC BY SA 3.0.
> > 
> > I agree that CC is a much better choice than OPL.
> > 
> > How do we make this relicensing work? I.e., if contributor X agreed that
> > their content could be used under the OPL, how is it that we can just
> > take that content and distribute it under a different license? I don't
> > remember if the CLA has any wording on this. (Obviously the intention of
> > the licenses is very similar, but nonetheless it seems like a murky
> > situation. We did have someone withdraw from Fedora and take their toys
> > with them when we last made a license change on the the wiki, IIRC).
> 
> Well, basically, we really should ask the contributors to consent to the
> relicensing, and get their "written" permission in email. Technically,
> these contributions were made under the terms of the CLA, and unless
> those folks explicitly stated that their contributions were under the
> OPL, Fedora is technically able to relicense those contributions however
> we desire.
> 
> I say "technically" a lot there, because I do not want to leverage that.
> I think the clear intent of contributors contributing to an OPL licensed
> document is that their contributions are under OPL terms. In fact, I
> want to remove that loophole in the next revision of the Fedora CLA.
> 
> So, we should just go ahead and get permission from all the contributors
> (writers and translators) to relicense their works, and if anyone does
> not give permission, we should remove/replace their contribution.
> 
> ~spot

That is a large task, Im not sure an email chain would be the best way to handel that, however I am not sure what is.

-- 
Zach Oglesby
GPG Key: 1378F79F
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Zoglesby
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/docs/attachments/20090625/5d2a5e6c/attachment.bin 


More information about the docs mailing list