[TAG] License Question

[Martin]

Hello,

according to your author FAQ[0] under "Copyright Issues" you state
that you will publish the works sent to you under the Open Publication
License. The Wikipedia article states that the author of the OPL
recommends using a Createive Commons License as a replacement. I
understand that there are issues with the existing articles which may
prevent relicencing them but for new articles would it be OK if I'd
like to articles to be published under a Creative Commons License -
personally I prefer "by-nc-sa" for written works and "by-sa" for code
works.

Given that efforts to keep the OPL updated seem to have stopped
(actually never made it beyond a version 1.0) at 1999-07-08 I think
switching to a CC license should be considered, maybe even let authors
choose between

 * default (stay with OPL)
 * the CC options

any thoughts on that?

regards
martin

PS: no I don't think you can't google but I guess it's a lot easier to
just click the link of my sources, we all got enough work to do.

[0] http://linuxgazette.net/faq/author.html#policy
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Open_Publication_License&oldid=230659639
[2] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
-- 
http://www.xing.com/profile/Martin_Marcher

You are not free to read this message,
by doing so, you have violated my licence
and are required to urinate publicly. Thank you.