- From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:36:46 -0800
- To: Wendy Seltzer <wseltzer@w3.org>
- Cc: "Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH)" <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com>, public-w3process <public-w3process@w3.org>
> On Dec 16, 2014, at 11:49 , Wendy Seltzer <wseltzer@w3.org> wrote: > > On 12/16/2014 02:29 PM, Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH) wrote: >>> I believe we have that in the W3C Software License, a BSD variant that's already recognized as OSI Open Source and GPL-compatible. >> Is that appropriate for specs (as opposed to code) being incubated in GitHub/a Community Group? I think we want to keep this as simple as possible. >> > > The Software License refers to "software and documentation," but could > also be applied to any type of text. > > It grants "Permission to copy, modify, and distribute this software and > its documentation, with or without modification, for any purpose and > without fee or royalty" provided you give notice of the license, include > any disclaimers, and give notice of modifications. > > If those are the properties desired in a license, then the Software > License seems a fine one to use. I actually looked at how much tweaking the software license would need to have it clearly be a document license, and the answer is not much. > > --Wendy > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Wendy Seltzer [mailto:wseltzer@w3.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 11:21 AM >> To: David Singer; public-w3process >> Subject: Re: What is Process Good For? licensing >> >> On 12/16/2014 02:13 PM, David Singer wrote: >>> >>>> On Dec 16, 2014, at 9:18 , Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> What's wrong with something like the BSD license? or asking Creative Commons to create a simple document license that is compatible with GPL (and other popular software licenses) and that requires things like preserving copyright notices and disclaimers? >>> >>> It would be good to have a simple ‘please attribute but otherwise do as you will” text (copyright) license in existence that does not have the problems of cc-by. ideally it already exists and we avoid license proliferation. >> >> I believe we have that in the W3C Software License, a BSD variant that's already recognized as OSI Open Source and GPL-compatible. >> >> http://opensource.org/licenses/W3C >> >> We're aiming to take a first step toward more liberal licensing with the proposal, currently before the AC, to offer Code Components under the Software License: >> >> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2014/doc-license.html >> >> --Wendy >> >> >> -- >> Wendy Seltzer -- wseltzer@w3.org +1.617.715.4883 (office) Policy Counsel and Domain Lead, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) >> http://wendy.seltzer.org/ +1.617.863.0613 (mobile) >> >> > > > -- > Wendy Seltzer -- wseltzer@w3.org +1.617.715.4883 (office) > Policy Counsel and Domain Lead, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) > http://wendy.seltzer.org/ +1.617.863.0613 (mobile) David Singer Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:37:37 UTC