[SeasonOfDocs] licensing discussion

Tue Jul 9 01:27:03 PDT 2019

Hi Stephanie,

Is this true for documentation as well as any code snippets? Does this
effectively rule out our desire to use CC-0 or CC-By?

Jo

On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 11:22 PM Stephanie Blotner <sblotner59 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> For Uber to contribute to this effort, here's what I learned:
>
>    - We can easily contribute to these licenses: Apache 2, MIT, or BSD
>    (I'll need to jump through more hoops for other licenses)
>    - We *cannot* contribute to projects with the following licenses:
>       - No License
>       - AGPL
>       - GPLv3
>       - LGPLv3
>    - It’s also preferred if the project has no Contributor License
>    Agreement (CLA)
>
>
> Best,
> Stephanie
>
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 9:15 AM Stephanie Blotner <sblotner59 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Cameron,
>>
>> I've reached out, but haven't heard anything back yet.
>>
>> - Stephanie
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 8:33 AM Jo Cook <jo.k.cook at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Cameron,
>>>
>>> I've put this out to as many people as I can think of- both at Astun
>>> Technology and elsewhere. I hope I'll get a nice spread of answers within
>>> the fortnight- I'll let you know!
>>>
>>> Jo
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 7, 2019 at 11:17 PM Cameron Shorter <
>>> cameron.shorter at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> For those of you working at a company which may have an opinion on the
>>>> license selection we choose for TheGoodDocsProject, could you please reach
>>>> out to your legal department and ask them:
>>>> 1. Do they have an opinion on which licenses we select?
>>>> 2. Are they able to provide their opinion within a week or two?
>>>>
>>>> I expect we will select one of the permissive licenses, probably CC0
>>>> for media. I'm less opinionated about any code we create but suspect we
>>>> would adopt the license(s) of software projects we extend.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 at 05:52, Clarence Cromwell <
>>>> clarencewcromwell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think CCO would work for the templates, which is where I'm most
>>>>> interested in contributing.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope the templates can be used by corporate doc teams as well as
>>>>> open-source teams. I know next to nothing about licensing, but I think that
>>>>> would at least require the we allow commercial use without requiring
>>>>> share-alike licensing (which companies like mine would probably avoid).
>>>>>
>>>>> Clarence
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 2:47 PM Jennifer Rondeau <
>>>>> jennifer.rondeau at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm fine with CC-0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FWIW, the Kubernetes docs license is CC-BY and the code license is
>>>>>> Apache 2.0. We do not have an explicit code license in the docs repository,
>>>>>> however, which has led to some occasional confusion when people want to use
>>>>>> the docs with the example code. Example code isn't quite the same thing as
>>>>>> what we intend to provide as code/tools -- but it's analogous enough that I
>>>>>> offer the story as data to back the "let's be careful to license everything
>>>>>> appropriately" approach.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And +1000 to a "how to attribute" section in our now nicely named
>>>>>> metadocumentation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 4:51 PM Erin McKean <emckean at google.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi folks!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One of our action items from the past meeting was to discuss how to
>>>>>>> license any templates or other content produced by the project.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For background, here's a list of CC licenses:
>>>>>>> https://creativecommons.org/licenses/
>>>>>>> And here are software licenses (although I don't think that software
>>>>>>> licenses are generally useful for templates we should probably have the
>>>>>>> licensing discussion all in one go and since we may release tools/code that
>>>>>>> would be better served by software licenses ....)
>>>>>>> https://opensource.org/licenses
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For templates, I think the discussion is "what do we want to
>>>>>>> enable?" rather than "what do we want to prevent?" since bad actors are not
>>>>>>> noted for their scrupulous attention to licensing details. :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> CC-0 or CC-BY would be the two most open licenses. I like CC-BY but
>>>>>>> CC-0 with a (polite, not binding) request for attribution would be fine by
>>>>>>> me, too. FWIW, it is extremely difficult (to put it mildly) to use anything
>>>>>>> AGPL-licensed at Google, so I would strongly prefer to use Apache or MIT
>>>>>>> for any code/tools.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In any case, I think we should have a "how to attribute" section in
>>>>>>> our metadocumentation  and also reach out to the CC people when we've got
>>>>>>> something we want to share so that we can be included in their list of open
>>>>>>> culture resources.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other open questions:
>>>>>>>  * what do other similar projects use for their licenses?
>>>>>>>  * any other licenses on the no-go list? (e.g. NC-type licenses
>>>>>>> close off a lot of possible users/contributors)
>>>>>>>  * would we be incorporating content that would need SA-type
>>>>>>> licenses? Would we SA individual tools/docs?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In responding, if you could please state either a clear preference
>>>>>>> or a "anything's fine by me" we can try for a rough consensus quickly --
>>>>>>> since relicensing is problematic we probably need to have this decided
>>>>>>> before anything substantial gets published.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also I am NOT A LAWYER, just a copyright geek, so I would like to
>>>>>>> collect questions and then take them to A Real Lawyer™️ for answers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Erin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Erin McKean | Developer Relations Program Manager, Open Source
>>>>>>> Strategy | emckean at google.com | she/her
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> SeasonOfDocs mailing list
>>>>>>> SeasonOfDocs at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/seasonofdocs
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> SeasonOfDocs mailing list
>>>>>> SeasonOfDocs at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/seasonofdocs
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> SeasonOfDocs mailing list
>>>>> SeasonOfDocs at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/seasonofdocs
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Cameron Shorter
>>>> Technology Demystifier
>>>> Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant
>>>>
>>>> M +61 (0) 419 142 254
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> SeasonOfDocs mailing list
>>>> SeasonOfDocs at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/seasonofdocs
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ------------------------
>>> http://about.me/jocook
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SeasonOfDocs mailing list
>>> SeasonOfDocs at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/seasonofdocs
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stephanie Blotner
>>
>>
>
> --
> Stephanie Blotner
>
>

-- 
------------------------
http://about.me/jocook
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/seasonofdocs/attachments/20190709/74622d2c/attachment-0001.html>