search

Tox / Tox-Docs

The Tox Docs project works to document our core library and API
https://libtoxcore.so
Other
26 stars 18 forks source link

License #22

Closed Calinou closed 9 years ago

Calinou commented 9 years ago

https://github.com/Tox/Tox-Docs/blob/master/LICENSE

Switch to CC BY or CC BY-SA, please. CC BY-NC-SA is not a free culture license.

TheLastProject commented 9 years ago

I thoroughly agree. There's no sense in keeping people from using the Tox documentation in any commercial way. However, I do not own the copyright, so I have no power over this.

urras commented 9 years ago

So in order to change this, I'm pretty sure we would need all of the contributors to agree. Incoming CC list:

Proplex commented 9 years ago

I agree

kenany commented 9 years ago

:+1: for either CC BY or CC BY-SA

Jman012 commented 9 years ago

I agree.

hrastnik commented 9 years ago

I say whatever the most agrees upon.

TheLastProject commented 9 years ago

@IRIXUser In the same way Free Software licenses may not disallow commercial usage.

ProMcTagonist commented 9 years ago

I agree to changing the license to a true free license without the noncom restriction.

stal888 commented 9 years ago

ayy

BY-SA has been granted the blessing of the tomato

urras commented 9 years ago

@stal Thank you, based Tomate

saneki commented 9 years ago

Sounds good to me.

urras commented 9 years ago

Sorry guys, looks like @stqism is going to be our blocker

@NikolaiToryzin | I can't see a single justifiable need to be able to use it commercially

netbsduser commented 9 years ago

@urras non-commercial licence is used to ensure that Tox developers and contributors are not exploited by vampires, who produce nothing of value but simply sell on what was created by someone else's work. This is not a good thing, it's theft from the commons. Tox must demand respect and reciprocity from those who use the docs; why should it freely invite bloodsuckers and leeches to abuse it?

dubslow commented 9 years ago

GPL allows commercialization. Any truly libre software must allow commercialization. Now as to said software's documentation...

netbsduser commented 9 years ago

@dubslow what a rancid, exploitative, worthless freedom that is. I see no reason to permit the corporate exploitation of independent labourers. That's bloodsuckery, vampirism, it's as bad as those unpaid 'internships' and should be wiped from the pages of history.

ProMcTagonist commented 9 years ago

@stqism

You said in IRC that you didn't want to change it because it would be too much work, ("weeks"), but everybody jumped on it within two days.

There's no reason TO have that restriction. Come here and state with your own account that you want the tox docs to be nonfree. I look forward to your next excuse.

Calinou commented 9 years ago

@IRIXUser: the problem is unethical commercial exploitation, which can be prevented using copyleft.

http://freedomdefined.org/Licenses/NC

The key problems with -NC licenses are as follows:

  • They make your work incompatible with a growing body of free content, even if you do want to allow derivative works or combinations.
  • They may rule out other basic and beneficial uses which you want to allow.
  • They support current, near-infinite copyright terms.
  • They are unlikely to increase the potential profit from your work, and a share-alike license serves the goal to protect your work from unethical exploitation equally well.

Either way, we should not use license clauses to prevent commercial use and selling.