<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 1:44 PM, DM Smith <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dmsmith@crosswire.org" target="_blank">dmsmith@crosswire.org</a>></span> wrote:<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div><div><br></div>Each copyright owner has several fields in the conf that they can fill out with that information. Most use the About field. A few use some other fields. Consult the module's conf for the information that you want. If it is not there then please assume that the owner did not want to share it or did not provide it.</div>
<div> </div></div></blockquote><div> </div><div>It sounds like this process is not dealth with in a formal (meaning legal agreement) way. If that's the case the point is no clear terms of use have been established by the Copyright holder save for distribution which hasn't actually be defined (legally). </div>
<div> </div><div>This likely isn't idea from Crosswire's perspective. You might want to review this for the sake of formalization. Since this is the case, I won't question this further.</div><div><br> </div>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div>Have I come down hard on you? I know I have been direct and have tried to be informative.</div>
<div> </div></div></blockquote><div> </div><div>No, and you've succeed in your goal.</div><div> <br></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div>We've only been talking about one part of the license agreement: the right to re-distribute modules. We think that the DistributionLicense field states it very well.</div><div> </div>
</div></blockquote><div> </div><div>DM, how Crosswire manages its licensing rights should probably be taken off-line and made internal. It seems to me you doesn't actually have a license, or at most a poorly defined one.</div>
<div> </div><div>If someone were to challenge Crosswire's right to 'distribute' Copyright text, Crosswire's bum would be better protected by having a license agreement, which terms (like distribution) defined, not simply an agreement in principle completed through attributes in a .conf file.</div>
<div> </div><div>Copyright and 'License to Distribute' are not attributes of configuration files, they are concepts covered by License agreements, and Law.</div><div><br> </div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div>I don't think that is the case. I work on copyright modules and have never seen a license agreement. I've never felt the need to see it. I always treat a copyrighted work as a confidential, intellectual property to which I only have sufficient privileges to do my work on the module. I'm sure that I might be going beyond what is required, but I'd rather make that mistake than betraying the owner's trust.</div>
<div> </div></div></blockquote><div> </div><div>Even Open-Source Software is covered by License Agreements. Surely you've heard of GNU General Public License (GPL), Apache License 2.0, MIT License.</div><div> </div><div>
If you've ever worked on non-Open Source software, you've worked under a license of somesort or another (whether you saw it or not). Owners of intellectual propery, generally don't give up their intellectual propery rigths so freely.</div>
<div> </div><div>It may be true you've nevered read the license, but just about all software is covered under one license or another. Copyright Work is no different.</div><div> </div><div> </div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div> </div><div>Peter and Chris will have seen those agreements that they have participated in obtaining. They have no need to have seen any others.</div><div><div class="im"><br></div></div>
</div></blockquote><div> </div><div>I'm not doubting Peter and Chris have seen agreements, or the skill with which they navigate the sensitivies around obtaining permission to distribute Copyright Text. Rather, there's debate around whether my actions (posting a module to my repo) was reasonable. I'm claiming yes, given that the details of these agreements are not public. I assumed that if Crosswire has the right to distribute a module it has the right to distsribute a development module.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div><div><br>
</div>Peter has told you privately of at least one that he was able to download. Do you want that to be repeated here?</div><div> </div></div></blockquote><div> </div><div>Yes, I have no objection to it being repeated here. I don't believe I've received an email privately from Peter, though I'm filtering all SWORD Developers emails into one folder. It could have been private, but I didn't notices.</div>
<div> </div><div>Regardless, I'm not aware of any modules exclusive to Crosswire that were available. I believe mods.d.tar.gz could have falsely reported many as available which weren't, but no module (should have been) publicly obtainable, if one had tried (or my security is not up to snuff).</div>
<div> </div><div>If I've err'd in my security I have nothing to hide. I invite Peter or really anyone to let me know of my mistakes. An error however is not purposeful, and is correctable. </div><div> </div><div>
<br> </div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div>We accurately summarize it in the conf. We have explained it here. What is hard about understanding that? What more is needed?</div>
<div> </div></div></blockquote><div> </div><div>The terms of rights and restrictions covered under a Copyright license however, are elements of the license, not a configuration file. No court in the would accept a .conf file as evidence Crosswire had the right to distribute Copyright Work.</div>
<div> </div><div> ~A</div></div></div></div>