W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > January 2008

Re: Licensing

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:07:35 -0500
Message-ID: <47866CF7.2010503@inkedblade.net>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jan 2008, Alex Mogilevsky wrote:
>> I am not a lawyer but I think you get it backwards. It is your work, 
>> then you get to choose how to license it. If you license it to W3C which 
>> then publishes your work under a more restrictive license (I am assuming 
>> you are not happy about that part), the original work is still available 
>> from you directly, isn't it?
> 
> Yes. I'm saying that I would not be willing to license my tests to the W3C 
> under a different license than the 3-clause BSD, MIT, or Apache v2 licenses.

This is not being very helpful. I can add your tests right now under both the
BSD, MIT, or Apache license (or all three) and the W3C Document License grant,
but I cannot add them if you refuse to license them under the W3C license. If
these are the terms of your contribution, you should have mentioned that in
your message in September.
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2007Sep/0010.html

Arron Eischolz has already put in many hours reviewing your tests to prep
them for adding to the test suite. I don't have a problem with you imposing
such constraints on any new tests, but I think it would be rather vicious of
you to retract your existing offer like this. It's not like you didn't know
the licensing policy when you made it.

~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 10 January 2008 19:07:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 20 September 2010 17:51:55 GMT