The real first question is whether a layout file can be covered by copyright to begin with.
As I pointed out before, one good example is fonts. While their names can be copyrighted, the actual outline and metric files cannot be. I have no doubt that in the current state of the law, the application code can be copyright material; I am not so sanguine about layout files. I should add that I have not practiced law in about fifteen years, and intellectual property law has changed a good bit in that time. Finally, I do believe that if you wish to be covered, the wiki should have a copyright statement something like: "Files submitted to the wiki for general download are covered by the XXX license in the name of their respective author, unless specified otherwise by the contributing authors." I would suggest something like the BSD license as the basic one, so there are no real limitations or questions about use--commercial or otherwise--but giving the contributor the option of choosing another one if he or she desires. That way, if the files can be copyrighted, they would be covered in all cases. It would also cover those that are submitted when the author doesn't want to go to the trouble of figuring all of this out, but does not wish for others to claim copyright to his or her work. David On 6/16/06, Steve Litt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 06:06 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, David Neeley wrote: > > Comments within > > > > On 6/12/06, Steve Litt > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Why can't the original author label his or her contribution as "Licensed > >> under the GNU General Public License, Version 2", or similar. Layout > >> files are code, so the GPL fits them well. Speaking for myself, I'd be > >> hesitant to contribute anything without GPL'ling it, because some > >> licenses leave open the door for a big bad company to change my layout > >> just a little bit and take it proprietary, and who knows, some day sue > >> me for using code derived from their code, and then I have to prove that > >> mine preceded theirs. > > <snip> > > > There is a considerable debate, as you probably know, about whether the > > GPL is a good idea for areas such as these in which a layout may be used > > to create commercial documents. That is why I would suggest something > > like the BSD approach that permits commercial use. > > <snip> > > > Finally, it is unlikely that layout files themselves would be an > > issue--since the objective is the documents created with that layout > > file and not the layout file itself. I really think that this discussion > > is largely the result of worry over what is very unlikely to happen to > > begin with--but a reasonable application of a license is certainly not a > > bad idea at all. > > This is issue is apparently a bit complicated. However, I think it was a > good idea to emphasize that wiki authors are free to license their work > as they see fit, especially any files they upload. So, for the page > > http://wiki.lyx.org/Site/Copyrights > > What do you about adding a paragraph such as this: > > Please note that contributors are free to license uploaded > material as they see fit. So if you wish to upload layout examples > under some specific license, please do so. I HUGELY like this. License has always been important to me. I believe the VimOutliner project evolved so well in part because of my original choice to license it GPL. I felt funny about putting my stuff up there with a license chosen by others, so this is a good thing. In a related thread somebody mentioned GPL wouldn't be good because some people use LyX for commercial purposes. I'd imagine the only thing being sold are the pdf or paper output (please let me know if you think I'm wrong), and I'd imagine (please let me know if you think I'm wrong) that the pdf or paper output would be like a report made by the software, not a compiled version of the software. If I'm wrong, my whole business is illegal, as I sell proprietary books assembled with various free software, including GPL. Thanks SteveT Steve Litt Author: * Universal Troubleshooting Process courseware * Troubleshooting Techniques of the Successful Technologist * Manager's Guide to Technical Troubleshooting * Twenty Eight Tales of Troubleshooting * Rapid Learning: Secret Weapon of the Successful Technologist http://www.troubleshooters.com/bookstore http://www.troubleshooters.com/utp/tcourses.htm
