[Bf-docboard] Blender Manual: License

[Tobias Heinke]

Hi everybody,

I propose to remove CC0 mark and to upgrade to CC BY-SA 
<https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/>. It changes that a 
text passage has to be cited as a internet reference:

     "Blender documentation project, date, Blender manual 2.77, link"

We can define a standard by a "How to cite this manual" page in the 
about section.
The author could be the "Blender documentation project" collective. In 
theory someone can find out who is and was included in it.
And it makes citation possible in the manual and in that way follow the 
scientific standard.

"Keep in mind that you cannot waive rights to a work that you do not own 
unless you have permission from the owner."
     creative commons, 2016, CC0, 
https://creativecommons.org/choose/zero/?lang=en

This manual includes a lot of work with a license not compatible with CC0.
Work of researchers, programmers, publishers and also Blender itself!
GNU GPL is not compatible, because it's based on mentioning of the 
authors name.

     a list of licenses compatible with BY-SA; 
https://creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses/
     more info on compatibility: 
https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/ShareAlike_compatibility

i.e. the Blender icons - made by Andrzej Ambroż - featured in most of 
the UI screenshots.
Of cause submitting work to Blender implicating that it can be used in 
the manual.

And this has a moral dimension, because I see it as a human right that 
the creator is the owner of her unique work
and is not allowed to waive of ownership (- that's why I'm passionate 
about that).
If the beneficiary is a person or a incorporation it's obvious why it is 
evil.
     i.e. A millionaire can pay Picasso to draw him a painting licensed 
under CC0.
     The millionaire can then add his signature in the corner and 
announce publicly to be greatest painter ever lived.
But if the public is the beneficiary no one gets hurt - right?

CC0 is also limited by the legal framework the creator is operating in, 
making this fuzzy.
i.e. the controversy between the german rights of use and copyright.
There's the a difference between a tool (some parts of software) and an 
unique artwork (manual = literature).
As literature copyright is applied making CC0 void by law. (I'm not a 
lawyer, so I can't proof this opinion)

The question is, has these change an impact on other part of Blender?
Shipping the manual with the software as a bundle? - as I remember Ton 
said on a BlenCon.
But even if - We don't have a choice, but to upgrade!

Yours sincerely,

Tobias


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-docboard/attachments/20160408/a49806f2/attachment.htm