Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 12:49:38 +0100 From: Nik Clayton <nik@bsdi.com> To: doc@freebsd.org Subject: [lauriep@oreilly.com: OPL 2.0 Review] Message-ID: <20000903124938.A71992@canyon.nothing-going-on.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi guys, This is probably a worthwhile list for people to be on. N ----- Forwarded message from Laurie Petrycki <lauriep@oreilly.com> ----- Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 10:47:22 -0500 From: Laurie Petrycki <lauriep@oreilly.com> To: "Tim O'Reilly" <tim@oreilly.com>, Eric Raymond <esr@thyrsus.com>, David Wiley <dw2@opencontent.org>, Chuck Toporek <chuck@oreilly.com>, Andy Oram <andyo@oreilly.com>, Frank Pohlmann <fpohlman@oreilly.com>, Frank Willison <frank@oreilly.com>, Ellen Siever <ellen@oreilly.com>, Guylhem Aznar <guylhem@metalab.unc.edu>, jeremy@valinux.com, tridge@linuxcare.com, Betsy Waliszewski <betsy@oreilly.com>, John Kling <johnk@oreilly.com>, sara@oreilly.com, bruce@hams.com, karsten@opensales.com, mitchell@mozilla.org, ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr, rosalia@nis.lanl.gov, pjones@metalab.unc.edu, aleonard@salon.com, dgl@bsdi.com, d-mueth@uchicago.edu, d@valinux.com, ndw@nwalsh.com, nik@bsdi.com, "Lawrence E. Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>, kevin lenzo <lenzo@cs.cmu.edu>, stephanie.wall@newriders.com, michael.slaughter@awl.com, rms@gnu.org, john.wait@awl.com, Paula Ferguson <paula@oreilly.com>, Michael Loukides <mikel@oreilly.com> Subject: OPL 2.0 Review Eric Raymond, David Wiley, and I have created a first draft of an update to the Open Publication License (OPL). The revised version (2.0) of the license can be viewed online at http://opencontent.org/openpub/opl20.html. I've sent you this message because I believe you may be interested in participating in the discussion concerning the revision. If you would like to join the discussion please subscribe to the mailing list set up by the generous folks at linuxdoc.org (thanks, guylhem). To subscribe send a message to opl-discuss-request@linuxdoc.org following standard mailing list subscription rules. Please forward this message to anyone else you feel could add value in finalizing the license. We've incorporated several changes into this revision including an overall update to the language of license that I was working on several months ago with an attorneys with Pearson. A requirement has been added where all substantive modifications must be clearly marked in order to protect an author and original copyright holder for being held responsible for material not written by them. The options have been removed from the license, and therefore, commercial print rights to the work are held by the publisher. Some of the modifications to the license were made with the awareness of the FDL's (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) existence. I believe both licenses can coexist together to give authors and publishers a choice. The OPL protects the commercial efforts of the publisher and author while still giving something back to the community. The FDL makes a manual, textbook, or other written document "free" in the sense of freedom: to assure everyone the effective freedom to copy and redistribute it, with or without modifying it, either commercially or noncommercially according to the preamble to the license. I'm looking forward to a productive discussion. Regards, Laurie -- Laurie Petrycki O'Reilly & Associates Executive Editor Open Source and XML lauriep@oreilly.com * 317 770 8672 http://www.oreilly.com ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Marketing Director, BSDi EMEASA Royal Albert House, Sheet Street Windsor, Berkshire SL4 1BE T: +44 1753 705 102 F: +44 1753 705 108 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000903124938.A71992>