Actually, I stand partially corrected as of: > Actually, in Norway, I got a limited right to copy it, a given right > to modify it, a limited right to distribute it, and a limited right to > distribute copies.
Down here (Brasil) -- and I suspect in the USofA too -- NO (or, better saying, extremely limited) rights to modifying copyrighted works (IOW the _creation_ of derivative works is an exclusive right of the copyright holder modulus some "fair use" things) > > And I find that these rights are sufficient for my use of the books. > > > The wiki content is useful for other people, not only for them to > > read, but also for them to copy, modify and redistribute. And for > > them to do just that they need an explicit license. > > Which I fail to understand, as the limited rights provided to me by > law should be sufficient for the wiki content in most cases. > > Is it not like this where you are? Not really. Remember that this is Debian, and we like our stuff Free. The limited rights do not permit a wiki reader to modify an article and publish (in a magazine for instance) the modified article -- and we would like to have such rights (as we do have for all our software). Other thing is that there is no _real_ difference between software and documentation. What if I publish a bash/perl/python script on the wiki and it gets modified and then used as part of another, bigger piece of software -- exactly because it's useful? Got it? -- HTH, Massa -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
