[Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton at gmail.com
Wed Jan 21 18:47:50 UTC 2009

> There are various problems with making a distinction between print and
> online use when it comes to name inclusion. The first problem is that
> there are related questions which immediately pop up: Is it reasonable
> for a one page print document to have half a page or more of author
> metadata? Is it reasonable for a t-shirt to have to include a metadata
> text-block? Is a DVD substantially different from a print product? Is
> a screen in a flight information system? So in order to deal with
> those cases, you start making more complex rules which, again,
> discourage meaningful re-use. This in spite of the fact that the
> usernames we are talking about, in a large number of cases, will only
> be unambiguous and meaningful if resolved to username URIs; the extent
> of their contributions can only be meaningfully ascertained when
> reviewing a page history.

A lot of the problems you are having there are because you are trying
to group things into "print" and "online". The correct dichotomy is
"online" and "offline". Of course you are going to have problems
classifying DVDs if your classifaction systems assumes all electronic
data is only available on the internet. I don't see a problem with
listing authors in fairly small print on the back of a t-shirt, seems
perfectly reasonable to me. If instead of names there's just a URL on
the t-shirt, does that mean I can't where it in China since people
seeing it won't have any way (without significant technical know-how)
to view the list of authors?

People choosing to submit work under a pseudonym have clearly
indicated that they are happen to be attributed under that pseudonym,
I don't see any need to provide context. (It's good to do so where
practical, of course.)

More information about the foundation-l mailing list