http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/05/business/05scan.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&...
So when can we start putting 3D printer files on Commons?
And should we recommend a content-like licence (e.g. GFDL, CC by-sa) or a software-like license (e.g. GPL)?
- d.
On 4/5/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/05/business/05scan.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&...
So when can we start putting 3D printer files on Commons?
I think the file format we need to support for that is COLLADA (kind of the SVG of 3D file formats); Brion has looked into that a while ago. There are still a couple of security & efficiency issues to sort out.
And should we recommend a content-like licence (e.g. GFDL, CC by-sa) or a software-like license (e.g. GPL)?
Neither. Put it into the public domain.
On 4/5/07, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 4/5/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/05/business/05scan.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&...
So when can we start putting 3D printer files on Commons?
I think the file format we need to support for that is COLLADA (kind of the SVG of 3D file formats); Brion has looked into that a while ago. There are still a couple of security & efficiency issues to sort out.
And should we recommend a content-like licence (e.g. GFDL, CC by-sa) or a software-like license (e.g. GPL)?
Neither. Put it into the public domain.
In some jurisdictions, an individual cannot put their work into the public domain, the best they can do is say "it's usable for all purposes" without any legal frame but their word. As far as I am concerned, a licence is therefore a better choice, especially one that has a viral form to it.
I'd go for a content-like license myself.
Delphine
On 4/5/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/05/business/05scan.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&...
So when can we start putting 3D printer files on Commons?
And should we recommend a content-like licence (e.g. GFDL, CC by-sa) or a software-like license (e.g. GPL)?
Heh. It would depend on the context.
A related issue we've already hit to an extent (mostly in explaining why people can't do certain things I will admit) and are likely to have to deal with sooner are second life objects. If someone releases the code to an object gpl would appear to be logical but screenshots of the object would appear to be better served by a free content licence.