W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2011

RE: Mozilla Proposal for HTML5 Spec Licence

From: Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 19:14:48 -0700
To: "'HTML Working Group'" <public-html@w3.org>
Cc: "PSIG" <member-psig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <02aa01cbf8b7$666ca190$3345e4b0$@com>
> > Yes, CC0 is suitable for dedicating your copyright and related rights
> > in computer software to the public domain, to the fullest extent
> > possible under law.

If you are suggesting a public domain dedication for the HTML5 specs, don't get your hopes up. Why would W3C members allow that? You expect them to release their community-created specifications without any conditions? No open source non-profit (including FSF and Apache) allows that with their valuable copyrightable software. No corporation (including Google and Mozilla) would release their own software as public domain. Why should W3C tolerate that for its specifications of software?

Open Web Foundation just published its specification licenses, which are already used by Google, Facebook, and others for publishing software standards. There isn't even a hint of "public domain" in that!

I suggest you quit demanding things from W3C or others that you don't actually need and that don't actually appear anywhere in your use cases. And that you are obviously not going to get from all contributors to the HTML5 specification.

If you focus your discussion on articulating some need for forking of the HTML5 specification rather than introducing the public domain as an alternative, you are more likely to influence events at W3C.

/Larry

bcc: Harvey Anderson @ Mozilla


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lachlan Hunt [mailto:lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au]
> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 2:24 PM
> To: Lawrence Rosen
> Cc: 'Gervase Markham'; 'HTML Working Group'
> Subject: Re: Mozilla Proposal for HTML5 Spec Licence
> 
> On 2011-04-11 23:15, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
> >> So Mozilla wishes to propose the use of the Creative Commons CC0
> >> License[2] for the HTML5 spec.
> >
> > I'm as supportive of the CC licenses as anyone else here, but I agree
> with the Creative Commons folks that their licenses are not intended
> for software. So please, Mozilla people, don't try to force the HTML5
> spec into a non-software licensing regime. The CC licenses simply don't
> address any of the fundamental IP issues relating to software.
> >
> > Here's what the CC FAQ says:
> >
> >     Can I use a Creative Commons license for software?
> >     We do not recommend it...
> 
> You copied from the general CC FAQ.  The CC0 FAQ explicitly says it may
> be used for software:
> 
> > May I apply CC0 to computer software? If so, is there a recommended
> > implementation?
> >
> > Yes, CC0 is suitable for dedicating your copyright and related rights
> > in computer software to the public domain, to the fullest extent
> > possible under law. Unlike CC licenses, which should not be used for
> > software, CC0 is compatible with many software licenses, including
> > the GPL. CC and the Free Software Foundation suggest that if you
> > choose to apply CC0 to software, you include the following notice at
> > the top of each file:
> >  ...
> 
> http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0_FAQ
> 
> --
> Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
> http://lachy.id.au/
> http://www.opera.com/
Received on Tuesday, 12 April 2011 02:15:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:27 GMT