bmaxey1@juno.com
Date: 02/18/01-03:37:36 AM Z
>>>Many documents have been copylefted. See http://www.linuxdoc.org
Nope ... the info mentioned in the link is copyrighted, not copylefted. I
hate that term because I would hazard a guess that very little legal
precedents support the term "copyleft".
If I am taking the time to write an article that I plan to sell, I want
the benefit of protection and that is accomplished with legal protection.
There are still restrictions to the Linux Docs pointed to with the above
link, and all have the same restrictions generally accepted. There is
some latitude in using the docs.
In the case of Linux, the idea is to have an operating system free from
constraints. It is for the most part, free, with source code free as
well. Once modified, Linux can be distributed in many ways. The problem
with the GNU system is you (the programmer) loose quite a bit because the
source code is made available. Once you accept the license, you are
stuck. Your source code represents hard work and it essentially becomes
free to the world.
I am not sure how this applies or would apply to most writers and
photographers, but do you want to make your work available more or less
for free? Read the GNU. As for copyrighting this list, why? You say that
you have no intentions of copyrighting the list which is good, I suppose.
There would be no need as long as you make the archives available and
accessible. No need for protection in this case.
Bob
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/02/01-09:55:25 AM Z CST