widely compatible free documentation license

Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 20:20 UTC by atai

To make a documentation work as widely usable as possible, yet remaining copylefted, would a license like this be a good idea?

"You may distribute this work under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later published by the Free Software Foundation, or the GNU General Public License, Version 2 or any later published by the Free Software Foundation, or Version 2.5 or any later version of the Create Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License published by Creative Commons."

Then, is there a good way to encourage derivative works to also be licensed under the same condition (i.e., trilicensed the same way)?

There's a problem, posted 2 May 2006 at 17:37 UTC by bi » (Journeyer)

"You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License."
-- GPL v2

No problem, posted 5 May 2006 at 14:29 UTC by abraham » (Master)

To bi: It just means that if you combine the work with another work covered by the GPL, you can only redistribute the combined work under the GPL. Which is the idea behind such triple licenses.

To atai: Yes, it would be a good idea. You can ask politely. It is usually more than enough, very few free software developers bother to change the original license (unless they have to, like in the example given to bi), even when it allows so.

FOAF updates: Trust rankings are now exported, making the data available to other users and websites. An external FOAF URI has been added, allowing users to link to an additional FOAF file.

Keep up with the latest Advogato features by reading the Advogato status blog.

If you're a C programmer with some spare time, take a look at the mod_virgule project page and help us with one of the tasks on the ToDo list!