| nettime's_legal_dictionary on Tue, 30 Jul 2002 22:45:00 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| <nettime> A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I got a PL digest [shand|nakov|recktenwald] |
Subject: Re: <nettime> question: GPL or OPL?
"Brett Shand" <[email protected]>
Novica Nakov <[email protected]>
Heiko Recktenwald <[email protected]>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From: "Brett Shand" <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 15:55:24 +1200
Subject: Re: <nettime> question: GPL or OPL?
On 29 Jul 02, at 10:12, [email protected] wrote:
> does anybody knows the difference between GPL and OPL?.
As far as I understand it (and by all that is merciful I am not a lawyer)
the OPL (which includes both the Open Publication License and the
Open Content License) relates to the publication of "high quality, well
maintained" content on the web. The license says:
"In plain English, the [OPL] license relieves the author of any liability
or implication of warranty, grants others permission to use the
Content in whole or in part, and insures that the original author will be
properly credited when Content is used. It also grants others
permission to modify and redistribute the Content if they clearly mark
what changes have been made, when they were made, and who made
them. Finally, the license insures that if someone else bases a work on
OpenContent, that the resultant work will be made available as
OpenContent as well." (see: http://www.opencontent.org/).
The GPL relates to sharing software. There are several GNU public
licenses, and CopyLeft is one of them, but basically they ensure that
when software is copied in any medium and then changed that the
freedom to change the software must be passed on to the next level
of users/developers. All you wanted to know and much more than you
wanted to know is at:
http://www.fsf.org/licenses/licenses.html
Brett
-----------------------------------
"Obey little, resist much." Walt Whitman
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 09:10:24 +0200
From: Novica Nakov <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <nettime> question: GPL or OPL?
[email protected] writes:
| about publishing texts on the web:
| does anybody knows the difference between GPL and OPL?.
GPL is a license that is designed for writing free software.
I guess it could be used for written documents as well.
However FSF has another license that covers written documents - FDL.
I think that it can be applied to everything except fiction writings.
I don't know what OPL is.
| And if we use the "C" and the "copyleft" statement it means we use the
| GPL?
When something is "copyleft" that means that it is uncopyrighted. But
you should point out under which terms it is uncopyrighted, since there
are several copyleft licenses available.
--
Novica
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 14:16:43 +0200 (CEST)
From: Heiko Recktenwald <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <nettime> question: GPL or OPL?
Hi,
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, Rick Bradley wrote:
> OPL should be applied to texts. The BSD license should be applied to
First you mention BSD ;-)
> code. While it is quite clearly all the same, lawyers tend to disagree.
Then you raise an interesting question.
The most important thing is to make the will clear. What shall be given
away ? And what not.
The will to giveaway can have many stages and is not accepted in all
jurisdictions, IMHO it is accepted in germany for software only.
H.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: [email protected] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]