Re: review all terms by cluster? refine the clusters? copyright? [was] Re: Proposal for a domain

Hi Craig,

You might have missed my point re: copyright.

Many definitions that are currently used, are actually (c) of the  
standards organisation that defined them. This means that we can't  
copy the definition for our our use - even though they are extremely  
relevant to our discussion. Example may be standards organisations  
definitions of risk, hazard etc.

I am not too concerned with regards to the copyright of our own  
contributions however, as I consider this to be a public domain  
discussion.

Cheers Gavin

On 22/06/2007, at 11:38, C H wrote:

> Copyright issues should be minimal or nil if we all
> agree that our contributions are to be released under
> Creative Commons attribution-sharealike-noncommercial
> license at some future point, and withheld from those
> who do not accept these release terms.  A commercial
> user may use the material simply for remitting any and
> all patent, trademark, copyright and domain name right
> they may have in terms essential to the ontology's
> use.
> Until this is worked out, we own our own
> contributions.