Subject:
|
Re: Contributor Agreement License details
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Wed, 17 Jan 2007 21:52:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3675 times
|
| |
|
|
Hi Zach,
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Zachary Best wrote:
> Second, I don't know whether this is a "culture-quip" but "license" is
> misspelled throughout CAReadme.txt.
Actually it is misspelt throughout the Licence but I can't be bothered to go
through it. Insofar as LDraw has an official language it is Australian English.
> Third, here is my understanding of how the license in the CALicense.txt file
> will apply to parts:
>
> The part file is the Work, and each part file must include the license. Any
> model file which contains the part file will be a Collective Work, and that
> Collective Work must contain the license describing that it affects the part
> file. A rendering of the part file or any model file containing the part file
> will be a Derivative Work. When you create this Derivative Work and distribute,
> publicly perform, publicly display, or publicly digitally perform said
> Derivative Work you must include, to the extent reasonably practicable,
> information pertaining to the copyright of the Work, licensing information of
> the Work, and credit to the author of the Work.
>
> So, at the very minimum it seems that when you credit yourself as the author of
> any Derivative Work you must credit all the authors of the Works you used as
> well.
Good point. Perhaps an additional comment like:
In order to avoid the listing of all contributing part authors it is sufficient
to give credit to "the LDraw Parts Library" in Derivative Works in lieu of such
a list.
As an addition to the end of the licence?
> Fourth, I am not so sure about being "free to make commercial use..." in such a
> broad sense. This is more spidey-sense than anything, and is again not legal
> advice, but the license keeps repeating distribute, publicly display, and
> publicly perform. Therefore, I think you can commercially distribute the Works,
> and I think you can commercially do stuff with Derivative Works and {probably}
> Collective Works... but I think it ends there. I do not think you can
> commercially display the Works...if that is even feasible. Therefore, I think
> the statement "free to make commercial use..." is overbroad and maybe
> misleading.
I don't want to mess with the Creative Commons licence. It was draughted by
lawyers.
Tim
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Contributor Agreement License details
|
| (...) Maybe it's just me, but if renderings are considered derivative works, we need to seriously step back and think long and hard about whether or not we are OK with that. I personally think that forcing renderings to have text on them (...) (17 years ago, 18-Jan-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | Re: Contributor Agreement License details
|
| (...) All of the parts authors would have to agree to that, because (and my knowledge is limited so if I mistake any assumptions let me know) the copyright of the part file seems to be held by the parts author not the LDraw Parts Library or any (...) (17 years ago, 18-Jan-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details
|
| First, let me disclaim that this is not legal advice. It is merely my understanding of the CA License. I do have some legal knowledge of copyrights, but for any legal advice please contact and retain an attorney. Second, I don't know whether this is (...) (17 years ago, 17-Jan-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
57 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
