Closed amunizp closed 6 years ago
@amunizp I think you would be better stating your issue with existing and suggesting why you think we should change
OK thanks, hopefully I can express this better. In my humble opinion:
Regarding the licence: resources/license.md
Currently it is CC-BY-NC-SA 3.0
My issue is the Non-commercial clause because:
It makes it incompatible with wikipedia licence
This isn't wikipedia.
It makes it incompatible with software licences
This isn't software.
If say, a member Hackspace would want to bundle it up in a had copy book and sell it in a market fair to benefit their members they could not because of the licence
Having a non commercial license basically says that others can't profit or make monetary gain from other people's work. That's likely the intention (to prevent that happening). I wouldn't want someone getting monetary gain from my work when I would give the work to them freely.
If the concern is for someone to pinch the whole document and then post it on the big distributors to be sold as an ebook we could swap to G-FDL which has an anti-DRM clause
That's not the same, though?
It is not a free culture licence which I believe goes in line with the general hackspace ethos
That allows commercial use, I haven't really seen anything saying that the general hackspace ethos was pro commercial, I've only seen hackspaces ethos be commercial tolerant.
We took this discussion over to the forum https://forum.hackspace.org.uk/t/licence-for-hackspace-foundation-resources/300 and I suspect that's probably a better place to discuss it than an issue.
I'll close this off and people should feel free to re-open it if they disagree
Are we completely bought in on the licence? Why not CC-BY-SA international 4.0?