These are chat archives for codebar/tutorials

24th
Mar 2015
priya121
@priya121
Mar 24 2015 08:48
Hey Despo, just having a look at the website, attribution non-commercial sharealike looks good.. If you want people to contribute to it and if they liscence their changes they give you credit and cannot pass it on for commercial reasons..
Creative Commons is such a great idea! Browsing their website right now..
Kriszta Matyi
@matyikriszta
Mar 24 2015 09:19
@priya121 what does the sharealike part means exactly?
priya121
@priya121
Mar 24 2015 09:32
@matyikriszta It means that you build upon or transform the material , you have to distribute the changes under the same conditions as the original liscence
So non commercial, giving credit to original author etc
Dave Gurnell
@davegurnell
Mar 24 2015 09:36
Who has the Copyright on the Codebar tutorials? The original author?
It won't be hugely important in practical terms if the tutorials are CC-licensed, but it's the sort of detail that needs to be correct.
Kriszta Matyi
@matyikriszta
Mar 24 2015 09:38
@priya121 thanks, makes much more sense now :)
priya121
@priya121
Mar 24 2015 09:44
@davegurnell I can look into it a little more but as far as I understand it's the person who creates the work and then executes the liscence
You're right it's the definitions that matter and I'm at work looking on the DL! So will have a closer look and see what I can find!
Dave Gurnell
@davegurnell
Mar 24 2015 09:47
Yes. By default it's whoever wrote the work.
Here are my thoughts...
  • Ideally, Codebar (whoever/ehatever that is -- has to be a legal person) should "own" the tutorials and licence them using an appropriate licence (CC-BY-SA-NC or whatever).
  • Failing that, there should be an agreement with the original author(s) that allows Codebar to operate without any possibility of future problems.
I don't know if this means assigning Copyright or just licenseing things. I'm sure most authors would be happy with any agreement as long as they get credit and know that the material will be used for good (as opposed to evil).
Dave Gurnell
@davegurnell
Mar 24 2015 09:53
I know a guy who runs a reasonably successful OSS web framework with a lot of contributors. I believe they have a central body that owns the Copyright to the code (and has a policy on keeping it open source etc). I'll ask him how they operate.
priya121
@priya121
Mar 24 2015 14:12
Yeah think it's always better to ask someone who's done it already!
David Banks
@amoe
Mar 24 2015 16:22
Just a heads up that noncommercial licenses fail the open source definition (http://opensource.org/osd-annotated)... How much you care about that depends on project priorities I guess
priya121
@priya121
Mar 24 2015 18:00
@amoe you're right, and there are a few articles online and the CC website itself says a CC liscence isn't the best liscence for source code as there is no distinction between source code and the object and so it can't fall within Free Software or Open Source..