No open source license

[schuyler1d]

The current specification isn't licensed in any way. It should be licensed in some open-documentation license.

[joshco]

See http://opensupporter.github.io/osdi-docs/license.html

[schuyler1d]

Right, but that's just related to patents. The osdi spec itself has no copyright terms. IANAL, but even if something in there releases copyright/shares distribution/modification rights of the spec, it should be clearer.

Something like https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.en.html Or http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

[joshco]

lets discuss at today's meeting

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 8:29 AM, Schuyler Duveen notifications@github.com wrote:

Right, but that's just related to patents. The osdi spec itself has no copyright terms. IANAL, but even if something in there releases copyright/shares distribution/modification rights of the spec, it should be clearer.

Something like https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.en.html Or http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/opensupporter/osdi-docs/issues/311#issuecomment-367680632, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AARuCgXp6DzL12R8SWV7geZcTVMR_SWWks5tXWujgaJpZM4SN_bI .

--

---

Connection reset by queer

Josh Cohen, EMT joshco@gmail.com | @joshco | LinkedIn http://linkedin.com/in/joshrcohen/ | GitHub https://github.com/joshco | OSDI http://opensupporter.org/ Hero Volunteer Management Software http://marriagehero.org/ | Join Gay KISS Army https://www.facebook.com/kissarmygay/

[joshco]

Here's a proposal based on the W3C copyright license. It allows republishing (like forking our repo for proposed changes), but prohibits publishing as a technical specification, or the representing the democratic consensus of OSDI

Copyright License

By using and/or copying this document, or the OSDI document from which this statement is linked, you (the licensee) agree that you have read, understood, and will comply with the following terms and conditions:

Permission to copy, and distribute the contents of this document, or the OSDI document from which this statement is linked, in any medium for any purpose and without fee or royalty is hereby granted, provided that you include the following on ALL copies of the document, or portions thereof, that you use:

* A link or URL to the original OSDI document.
* The pre-existing copyright notice (hypertext is preferred, but a textual representation is permitted) of the form: "Copyright © [$date-of-document] Open Supporter Data Interface (OSDI)

When space permits, inclusion of the full text of this NOTICE should be provided. We request that authorship attribution be provided in any software, documents, or other items or products that you create pursuant to the implementation of the contents of this document, or any portion thereof.

No right to create modifications or derivatives of OSDI documents is granted pursuant to this license, except as follows: To facilitate implementation of the technical specifications set forth in this document, anyone may prepare and distribute derivative works and portions of this document in software, in supporting materials accompanying software, and in documentation of software, PROVIDED that all such works include the notice below. HOWEVER, the publication of derivative works of this document for use as a technical specification, or as a representation of consensus of OSDI democratic decision-making process is expressly prohibited.

The notice is:

"Copyright © 2018 OSDI. This software or document includes material copied from or derived from [title and URI of the OSDI document]."

[joemcl]

What does this mean? "as a representation of consensus of OSDI democratic decision-making process"

[joshco]

it's to avoid this situation: Joemcl copies the OSDI specs, modifies it to include his favorite ideas and republishes it with the OSDI name. Then he goes around in the community trying to represent this modified version, and his own ideas as "the standard" as decided by the democratic community process.

Make sense?

[albjeremias]

so this spec is not open source, is copyrighted? Have you guys heard about activity pub?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ActivityPub

[sonyabea]

Closed by committee on 9/19/2018

[albjeremias]

Which committee? @sonyabea ?

[sonyabea]

The OpenSupporter tech committee met today and we combed through a bunch of backlog tickets.