Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Documentation license #768

Closed
spqr2 opened this issue Mar 31, 2013 · 9 comments
Closed

Documentation license #768

spqr2 opened this issue Mar 31, 2013 · 9 comments

Comments

@spqr2
Copy link

@spqr2 spqr2 commented Mar 31, 2013

The documentation on http://rg3.github.com/youtube-dl/documentation.html has a noncommercial clause (by way of the CC-BY-NC-SA license). This prevents Linux distributions from easily including the document as they generally require something that is OSI-compliant (such as CC-BY-SA).

@FiloSottile
Copy link
Collaborator

@FiloSottile FiloSottile commented Apr 1, 2013

Pinging @rg3 as he is the only one who can relicense (if he can).

Anyway I'm sure the generated man page (what one would expect a distribution to package) falls under the public domain declaration. Where would this documentation be used?

@rg3
Copy link
Collaborator

@rg3 rg3 commented Apr 1, 2013

If none of the people who modified the pages claims copyright over them (I don't know if not adding themselves to the copyright notification qualifies), I'm willing to relicense.

@rg3
Copy link
Collaborator

@rg3 rg3 commented Apr 1, 2013

BTW, the gh-pages branch has these authors apart from myself:

  • Filippo Valsorda
  • Jaime Marquínez Ferrándiz
  • Philipp Hagemeister
@phihag
Copy link
Contributor

@phihag phihag commented Apr 1, 2013

Sure, I'm fine with relicensing the documentation. @rg3, you originally wanted to make sure nobody copies the whole homepage, so I suppose this only applies to documentation.html?

@rg3
Copy link
Collaborator

@rg3 rg3 commented Apr 1, 2013

I think @spqr2 is specifically interested in documentation.html, but the license appears in several HTML files.

As I mentioned sometimes, the license is there because I really can't stand those sites that borrow your webpage text and attempt to use SEO so people land in their site, see the ads and finally click through to the real project site. They do a disservice. But if the result is an inconvenience for project packagers or distributors, I'm happy to change it. Whatever's more practical.

@FiloSottile
Copy link
Collaborator

@FiloSottile FiloSottile commented Apr 1, 2013

I hereby give complete rights to Ricardo Garcia to relicensce any work of
mine committed to this project repository to any branch, in any way, at any
time, at his will. This will hold true also for any future work until new
different statement by me. -- Filippo Valsorda

Filippo Valsorda

@rg3
Copy link
Collaborator

@rg3 rg3 commented Apr 3, 2013

Pinging @jaimeMF even if he only has one commit...

@jaimeMF
Copy link
Collaborator

@jaimeMF jaimeMF commented Apr 3, 2013

I hadn't answered because I only have one commit, but I have no problem on relicensing.

@rg3 rg3 closed this in a87558d Apr 3, 2013
@rg3
Copy link
Collaborator

@rg3 rg3 commented Apr 3, 2013

Done. :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.