Date: 16 Jan 2003 17:58:08 -0800 From: swear@attbi.com (Gary W. Swearingen) To: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> Cc: doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Document Copyrights/Credit Messages Message-ID: <m0n0m0sfkf.0m0@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20030116164835.V19422@wonkity.com> References: <20030107171925.W6075@wonkity.com> <20030116164835.V19422@wonkity.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> writes: > I have written a document for an in-house package. The SGML-formatted > text is entirely original, by me. > > The PDF and HTML versions of this document are generated with the FDP > tools, so they use callout images and stylesheets and other portions of > the formats defined by FDP. > > If I include the copyright message from the Handbook, it looks like I'm > giving permission to copy *my* document. What I want is to properly > credit and show copyrights for FDP, DocBook, and anyone else involved, > without granting permission to copy *my* document. Is that possible? Only a lawyer may give you legal advice. Here are some unqualified observations, after this quote from USC 17-103. (b) The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material. So much for "what belongs to whom", but of course we want things labeled so other people can know up front (before lawyers are hired :). So when practical, everything gets marked for ownership. But well- placed notices and explanations should do, either in the work or in accompanying info. If someone's license required placement of notices or license copies in the work, I'd either do what it requires or not use it (or try to get a waiver from the owner). AFAIK, there's nothing wrong with putting a notice A of your own before another notice B saying that notice B is only there because it's required and saying that its claims (eg, on your work) are invalid (when you think they are invalid). As to what FDP licenses require, I don't remember. I do sometimes wonder about the validity of a license from the claimed owner, "The FreeBSD Documentation Project" which is not a legal entity, AFAIK. BTW, note that many GPL'd works (some claiming to be wholly GPL- licensed) are derivatives being partially BSD-licensed, or even (especially .h headers) in the public domain, theoretically making it impossible to derive from it without violating the GPL which requires the whole of the derivative to be GPLed. :) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?m0n0m0sfkf.0m0>