Caltrops - Site Comments





	[quote name="Senor Barborito"][quote name="Chunguo"]Okay, a couple of points: 1. I'm not going to write the license you want. Creative Commons attribution would give you all those rights, without giving you ownership. I'm thinking of Chet and his 'the OMM forums will always be here'. Legally it's a terrible idea to assume things will stay the way they are. 2. Chet's position on copyright sounds (and I'm not a US lawyer, so this is subject to further research) more like him being a cunt. Has someone threatened to sue him? How about if he burnt the forums onto a CDROM and deleted it from his own hard drive, so he was transferring rather than copying? And who would sue? How could you assert ownership/authorship from a nick? Also, wouldn't the DMCA notice/takedown provisions protect you? That is, if someone says 'remove my postings you whore' you could (presumably) do it, yes? If so you're protected by s512 of the DMCA. How did he put it across to you? I'll do some research and get back to you, but with (1), the CC license would give you what you want - unlimited use subject only to attribution. With (2), if Chet wants to be a cunt we can't really stop him. Sigh. [/quote] 1. I apologize, I thought you were willing to author a license - I'm sorry if I presumed anything. I only recently learned that any work not for pay but not strictly pro bono is generally considered a I do find your advice invaluable, at least. Furthermore, the CC does not meet our needs because it effectively allows ANYONE to copy and paste the contents of Caltrops verbatim. This is not, if I understand correctly, what everybody wants. At least, I know a few people who don't want it, though probably a few who don't care. Those of you who'd rather have it under CC, mark a CC at the bottom of your posts when you put them up. 2. Anything you could do to gently reassure Chet that it would be OK would be HUGELY appreciated, as we'd kill for that data. --SB [/quote]