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

Re: Option 3

From: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:17:52 +0000
To: Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>, public-html@w3.org
Cc: PSIG <member-psig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20110309131752.GK4544@stripey.com>
Lawrence Rosen writes: 

> Here is Option 3 for your consideration:
> 
> ****************************
> 
> ... anyone may prepare and distribute derivative works and portions of
> this document ... in documentation of software, PROVIDED that all such
> works include the notice below. The notice is:
> 
> "Copyright C 2010 W3CR (MIT, ERCIM, Keio). This software or document
> includes material copied from or derived from [title and URI of the W3C
> document]." 

To clarify, if I wished to print part of a W3C spec published under this
licence on a mug, say a handy table that's frequently referenced, then I
would have to make sure there was room on the mug for the entirety of
the above copyright message, including the spec's full title and URL?

Using the HTML5 spec as an example, would the full legally required
title be simply 'HTML5' or would I have to fit 'HTML5: A vocabulary and
associated APIs for HTML and XHTML' on there?

And would a shortened URL that redirects to the official W3C one be
acceptable, or do I have to print the full official URL?

Even if part of the mug's content was my own work, which I was happy to
be made available on the mug without a copyright notice, the copyright
notice on the mug as a whole should be as above, thereby making it look
to any users of the mug that its entire contents are copyright by W3CR?

Would distributing such a mug actually make the contents be copyright by
W3CR, or just look that way?

Thanks.

Smylers
-- 
http://twitter.com/Smylers2
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 13:18:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:23 UTC