intrigeri:
> Christopher Sheats wrote (13 Oct 2015 21:03:53 GMT) :
>> Sadly, I will need to re-word your work to stay within
>> legal boundaries. Because of the content we are remixing from
>> other CC sources, the content we are developing will be CC-BY-SA (and
>> cannot also be GPL3).
>
> Anyone interested in this topic, there's a good summary there:
>
> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#ccbysa
Almost understandable, thanks!
> So, someone (possibly the Tails project) has to change their mind.
>
> a) Other ("CC") sources publish their work in a way that can be mixed
> with GPL-3 licensed work; you license under GPL-3 the work
> resulting from mixing their ("CC") work, ours (Tails) and new
> content of yours (that could itself be under whatever license you
> want as long as it's compatible enough with GPL-3);
>
> b) We relicense Tails documentation in a way that anyone can take
> content from there and put it under CC-BY-SA (4.0 presumably, since
> earlier versions are not DFSG-free IIRC).
>
> * We ("Tails developers") claim to hold the copyright on the
> entire source tree. As long as this claim is not contested, then
> we're allowed to relicense as we wish.
>
> * Dual-licensing would be ideal but I don't know if it can work in
> this case. I am not an expert in this field, though.
>
> * IMO CC-BY-SA is OK, so what matters is keeping our ability to
> copy'n'paste content between our documentation and source code
> without any need for licensing second thoughts (many Tails
> contributors are not skilled at licensing matters, nor do they
> find them particularly exciting to spend time on). I think
> that's one of the main criteria that shall be used to evaluate
> re-licensing proposals.
>
> Christopher, just to be clear: thinking through (b) and implementing
> it will take us time, and we're working on scarce resources. You might
> find (a) easier. Or, you could help make (b) happen :)
I'm fine with b). We could say that everything under wiki/src is
CC-BY-SA 4.0. What would this imply in terms of work?
- Making sure that this proposal is technically correct:
- That we are allowed to do that (and under which conditions).
- That we can still copy stuff from wiki/src elsewhere where the
GPL applies (in the code for example).
- Rework /doc/about/license.
- Add the text of CC-BY-SA under wiki/src?
- Contact everybody who contributed to wiki/src?
Anything else?
Christopher, if you know a bit of Git and are ready to work on this it
will probably take you less time than to rephrase our warnings enough to
be legally acceptable :)
