[tei-council] Fwd: TEI licensing issues

[Gabriel Bodard]

I very much agree with Piotr's point here: keeping an attribution clause 
on TEI output is not about enforcement or giving us the opportunity to 
sue people if they forget to cite us, but just of generally expecting to 
be cited and attributed. (By the same token, when would we ever enforce 
a no-derivatives clause?)

Multi-license ftw.

G


On 2011-09-09 14:03, Piotr Bański wrote:
>>> That would mean public domain, which might be fine for the TEI-C in this
>>> very context, though I'd say that at least the BY aspect is usually
>>> worth keeping.
>>
>> can you imagine where we'd ever enforce it?
>
> I wasn't thinking of this from the perspective of enforcement, I rather
> thought of putting a TEI stamp there and merely expecting it to get
> honoured and mentioned in attributions. As I said, public domain just
> for the generated schemas doesn't sound very bad to me, but a copyright
> + a permissive license (BSD, LGPL) somehow seems more fitting, though
> let me stress that it's just my impression.

-- 
Dr Gabriel BODARD
(Research Associate in Digital Epigraphy)

Department of Digital Humanities
King's College London
26-29 Drury Lane
London WC2B 5RL

Email: gabriel.bodard at kcl.ac.uk
Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980

http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
http://www.currentepigraphy.org/