Re: gnome.org content licence(s)

["Luis Villa" <luis tieguy org>]

[Following up on this older thread that never was completed.]

On 11/3/06, Quim Gil <qgil desdeamericaconamor org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 19:35 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
> > I suppose it should be the legal group's job to draft a similar
> > policy, assuming the board is fine with CC-SA + GFDL. Board, let us
> > know if that sounds sane, and I can hopefully devote a little time
> > this weekend coming up with a first draft of the language.
>
> Board hasn't said anything and I agree with your opinions. Let's put in
> practice that idea about the legal group being the best adviser of the
> board for legal stuff. Go ahead, please.

The legal group should be the best adviser for detailed implemenation
of board policy, and for giving a board a sense of what the policy
options are. The legal group is probably not the best adviser for
actually *chosing* between those options. I mean, I'm pretty sure I
know what you're going to pick- but I'm no longer an elected board
member and setting policy without that feels... incorrect. But feel
free to tell me I'm wrong and the legal volunteers (such as they are)
should set policy.

The policy options for gnome.org content licenses are pretty simple:

* we want to share with everyone, basically on the same terms as the
rest of 'our' IP
* we want to share but prevent commercial republication without
consultation with the Foundation
* we don't want to share

If the board can give us direction on that, we can look at the details
amongst ourselves and come back to you with more questions as
necessary.

Luis