- From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 11:32:39 -0400
- To: Norman.Walsh@East.Sun.COM, crism@lexica.net, ben@legendary.org, eve.maler@East.Sun.COM
- Cc: spec-prod@w3.org
Given a question about the creation of derivative works based on [1,2], elsewhere [3] I recommended the authors clarify the copyright owners (W3C or specific persons) and the specific licenses (W3C document or software license) under which they be distributed. I'm repeating this request in the spec-prod forum. The ambiguity created by these documents in the context of being hosted on the W3C site (which has specific terms and licenses) should be eliminated. [1] http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/06/xmlspec-v21.dtd [2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/10/11/xmlspec.xsl [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/site-policy/2002AprJun/0473.html Yes, or if Eve feels that she wishes to exclusively retain the copyright: "Copyright (c) 2000 Eve Maler. All Rights Reserved. W3C(r) liability, trademark, document use and software licensing rules apply. http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ " In either case, I recommend a further statement that it was obtained under a dated version of the W3C Software license: and "This document was made used in accordance with the W3C Software Policy http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-software-19980720 " -- Joseph Reagle Jr. http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/ W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/Signature/ W3C XML Encryption Chair http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/
Received on Friday, 14 June 2002 11:33:13 UTC