Subject: Re: Educational Community License question
From: "Jules" <hammerjammer@hammerjammer.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 03:06:32 +800

Hi Russell,

Thanks loads for the reply!
I was confused about where to put things such as (webpage URL, email 
address, etc, u know, stuff that constitutes a notice)

I was interpreting that everything from "Licensed under the 
Educational Community License version 1.0..." onwards must not be 
changed in order to comply with the OSI ECL License and thus be able 
to use the green OSI-approved license logo --- and this is what you 
are mentioned in your reply, if i read you correctly (did i read you 
correctly? :) )

Thanks very much for helping me identify where to put the stuff 
(between the "Copyright (c) year...." section and the "Licensed under 
the Educational..." portion).
It got really confusing as i didn't know where the ECL actually 
started, i.e. if it included the line "Copyright (c) year..." and you 
could not add anything other than what was listed as an example in 
that line, etc.

Once i apply the ECL license to my work, there is no additional 
special permission required from OSI itself in order to use the green 
OSI mark to show that the document is licensed under OSI, yes?


May i make a suggestion for the benefit of newbies like me who are 
not experts in this field of interpretation of licenses:  it might 
help to expressly identify the different parts of the webpage since 
the license proper is not the entire webpage's contents but only a 
part of it.  I had mistakenly thought EVERYTHING that was displayed 
on that page had to be included inside to be constituted as a valid 
ECL1.0, INCLUDING the first paragraph at the top of the webpage, thus 
my confusion.  So, using the webpage of the ECL v1.0 as an example: 

<!--instructions on the usage of this license--->
This Educational Community License (the "License") applies to any 
original work of authorship (the "Original Work") whose owner (the 
"Licensor") has placed the following notice immediately following the 
copyright notice for the Original Work:

<!---your copyright--->
Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders>

<!--fill in any additional notices or info here-->

<!---the following section is the License proper and may not be 
altered--->
Licensed under the Educational Community License version 1.0...etc 
etc...


This could help cut down on newbies like me raising the questions i 
just did  :)

Again, thanks Russell & Joseph for all your help!  You've helped me 
understand the webpage-display-vs-license-proper a lot more clearly.

Rgds,
J


From:           	Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>
Date sent:      	Tue, 1 Nov 2005 10:52:46 -0500
To:             	license-discuss@opensource.org
Subject:        	Re: Educational Community License question

> Jules writes:
>  > I interpreted that line to mean only to what was printed
>  immediately > following, without any modification allowed. > I
>  thought the OSI intended to have the whole thing as listed in the >
>  webpage in as verbatim and any change would have rendered the license
>  > invalid and thus not capable of applying the OSI License
>  Mark/Graphic > on the documentation.  Looks like my assumption was
>  incorrect. :)
> 
> Your assumption is correct.  You cannot change a single word of a
> license without losing approval.
> 
> You claim copyright when you say "Copyright...".  You give up some of
> your copyright rights when you say "Licensed...".  You can give up the
> same or different rights if you say "Also Licensed...."  You should
> ALWAYS list all licenses that apply.  The ECL happens to require that
> you do so.  It's not a necessary term to have in a license, but
> obviously some lawyers like to state the obvious just in case it's not
> as obvious as one would obviously think.
> 
>  > So, I guess i can insert my customized notices between these two >
>  lines: > "Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders>" > and > "Licensed
>  under the Educational Community License version 1.0" > and not be in
>  contravention to the OSI license, yes?
> 
> Yes, that is what you should do.
> 
>  > Can anyone from the Board or Management of the Open Source
>  Initiative > confirm this is indeed ok by the OSI? 
> 
> I'm not stating an official position that has been voted on by the OSI
> board even though I'm a member of the board.  I do think that I'm
> restating things on the OSI website that the board has already voted
> on.  I'm also giving legal advice even though I'm not a lawyer.  I can
> do that because ... I'm not a lawyer.  Lawyers can't ethically give
> legal advice to the public.  You are well advised to get legal advice
> from a lawyer, just as you should get programming advice from a
> programmer.  I don't know what you should get from a programming
> lawyer or a legal programmer.
> 
> -- 
> --my blog is at     blog.russnelson.com         | 
> Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | There ought to be a
> law 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241       | against calling
> for more Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog          |
> regulations!
> 
> 


"Slavish adherence to tradition is a sign that one has nothing better 
else to think 
about."
- Natasha Kerensky