Fedora Magazine RFR

[Anand Capur]

On 6/21/07, Karsten Wade <kwade at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 23:35 +0530, Anand Capur wrote:
>
> > I mean people are free to use, copy, etc.. the articles and since the
> > CLA is for copyrighted stuff, I guess we wouldn't need it signed.
>
> Hmm.  I don't want to take this too far off the path, and it's certainly
> off-topic for this list.  Hopefully I can clear this up with a single
> post.
>
> There are a few things to keep in mind:
>
> * At least in the US, copyright exists the moment you create a work.
> This means you have to actively choose to _give_up_ your copyright.  For
> Fedora Magazine to do that, it would have to have a legal notice that it
> was all public domain, etc.
>
> * Fedora cannot take contributions into anything we (re)distribute that
> do not come from a person who has signed the CLA.  So, I can take a
> patch from a non-CLA person, but when that patch goes into a package, it
> is done by me (a CLA person).  Same with a fix for content from someone
> who emails me that "such and so" is incorrect in a doc.
>
> These are not anywhere official yet, but they are approved by legal
> counsel:
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/KarstenWade/Drafts/CLAAcceptanceHierarchies
>
> If content goes into something we distribute, whether in an ISO or HTML
> file, it has to be under the CLA.  A click-through CLA is sufficient for
> content that is Web-only.
>
> * The way Fedora achieves the goal you lay out for people to be "free to
> use, copy, etc." the content that comes from Fedora Magazine is to
> license that content.  Same as we do with source code.  Thus, Fedora
> Magazine would be under the OPL (most likely), but we could look into
> the possibility of using the CC BY-SA.
>
> Clear as mud? :)
>
> - Karsten
> --
>    Karsten Wade, 108 Editor       ^     Fedora Documentation Project
> Sr. Developer Relations Mgr.     |  fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
>    quaid.108.redhat.com           |          gpg key: AD0E0C41
> ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\


Heh, yep clear as mud! Ok, well OPL is fine for me. I just used CC BY-SA as
a possibility. Legal issues are always confusing...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/attachments/20070621/713f91fa/attachment.htm>