[od-discuss] Open Definition Telecon 15:00 UTC Thursday 2015-02-12

Sun Feb 15 17:38:51 UTC 2015

We could say "that or what" or some similar combination that indicates both variations are acceptable. With only the "what", I don't see precise reference to the "that" version being acceptable…

On 02/15/2015 08:11 AM, Andrew Rens wrote:
> I think the question is not what is the least burdensome way of writing
> a licence but a factual question. Do (some) licences that should be
> regarded as open definition requires that modified versions state what
> changes have been made.
>
> And if one looks at the GNU Free Documentation Licence 1.3 then in
> Section 4 on Modifications it requires that quite a few changes must be
> recorded.
>
> It reads
>
> "You may copy and distribute a Modified Version of the Document under
> the conditions of sections 2 and 3 above, provided that you release the
> Modified Version under precisely this License, with the Modified Version
> filling the role of the Document, thus licensing distribution and
> modification of the Modified Version to whoever possesses a copy of it.
> In addition, you must do these things in the Modified Version:"
>
> "C. State on the Title page the name of the publisher of the Modified
> Version, as the publisher. "
>
> "I. Preserve the section Entitled "History", Preserve its Title, and add
> to it an item stating at least the title, year, new authors, and
> publisher of the Modified Version as given on the Title Page. If there
> is no section Entitled "History" in the Document, create one stating the
> title, year, authors, and publisher of the Document as given on its
> Title Page, then add an item describing the Modified Version as stated
> in the previous sentence."
>
> "M. Delete any section Entitled "Endorsements". Such a section may not
> be included in the Modified Version."
>
> Quite specific conditions. Yet I would regard the GNU Free Documentation
> Licence as exactly the kind of licence which should be compliant with
> the Definition.
>
> Similarly 2.3 of the Free Art licence  states "You have the right to
> modify copies of the originals (whether initial or subsequent) provided
> you comply with the following conditions: all conditions in article 2.2
> above, if you distribute modified copies; indicate that the work has
> been modified and, if it is possible, what kind of modifications have
> been made..."
>
> Again I would be reluctant to exclude this licence.
>
> IMO "or otherwise indicate what changes have been made" should be retained.
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> whether the or otherwise the licence may require that a modified version
> indicate what changes have been made.
>
> Andrew Rens
>
>
>
> On 14 February 2015 at 16:00, Herb Lainchbury
> <herb at dynamic-solutions.com <mailto:herb at dynamic-solutions.com>> wrote:
>
>     I'm not sure either, but I think that is a good edit.  If changing a
>     version number is sufficient, then indicating THAT a change has
>     occurred should be sufficient as well.  Simpler is better.
>
>
>
>     On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 8:29 AM, Aaron Wolf <wolftune at riseup.net
>     <mailto:wolftune at riseup.net>> wrote:
>
>         Apologies for missing the call today.
>
>         I noted one detail I wanted to clarify about in OD 2.1:
>
>         "The license may require that modified versions of a licensed
>         work carry
>         a different name or version number from the original work or
>         otherwise
>         indicate what changes have been made."
>
>         Do we really want "what" in "what changes have been made" and
>         not "that"?
>
>         Or should we say both? I think the requirement THAT changes have
>         been
>         made is more essential, and I worry that WHAT could be onerous
>         but I'm
>         not sure…
>
>         Aaron
>
>         On 02/12/2015 06:27 AM, Herb Lainchbury wrote:
>         > Reminder, our OD AC meeting is thirty minutes from now - Thursday,
>         > February 12th at 15:00 UTC.
>         >
>         > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Herb Lainchbury
>         > <herb at dynamic-solutions.com <mailto:herb at dynamic-solutions.com>
>         <mailto:herb at dynamic-solutions.com
>         <mailto:herb at dynamic-solutions.com>>> wrote:
>         >
>         >     Hello All,
>         >
>         >     Our next meeting is Thursday the 12th of February 2015 at 15:00 UTC.
>         >
>         >     That's:
>         >     0700 San Francisco
>         >     1000 New York
>         >     1500 London
>         >     1600 Berlin
>         >
>         >     other time zones:
>         >
>         >     http://www.worldtimeserver.com/convert_time_in_UTC.aspx?y=2015&mo=2&d=12&h=15&mn=0
>         >
>         >
>         >     We will be discussing:
>         >     * OD 2.1
>         >     * IMF license for data re-use
>         >     * recommendations to Surrey
>         >     * licenses waiting for assessment
>         >     * license approval process and communications
>         >     * open data and APIs
>         >
>         >     Please edit agenda and notes at:
>         >     https://docs.google.com/document/d/1t1_2_T-PeprvkLVwum5fY-od1hecUowFwaRvuQwDLNw
>         >
>         >     Notes from previous call can be found here:
>         >   
>          _http://opendefinition.org/2015/01/27/notes-from-open-definition-call-december-2014/_
>         >
>         >     Thanks,
>         >     Herb
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > _______________________________________________
>         > od-discuss mailing list
>         > od-discuss at lists.okfn.org <mailto:od-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
>         > https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
>         > Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss
>         >
>         _______________________________________________
>         od-discuss mailing list
>         od-discuss at lists.okfn.org <mailto:od-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
>         https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
>         Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss
>
>
>
>
>     --
>
>     Herb Lainchbury, Dynamic Solutions
>     250.704.6154 <tel:250.704.6154>
>     http://www.dynamic-solutions.com
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     od-discuss mailing list
>     od-discuss at lists.okfn.org <mailto:od-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
>     https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
>     Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss
>
>