Re-licensing the wiki (without the non-commercial clause)

Talk about anything related to Unvanquished.
User avatar
Melanosuchus
Programmer
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 6:42 pm UTC
Clan: Evil Ant Colony
Location: Virgo Superclaster

Re: Re-licensing the wiki (without the non-commercial clause)

Postby Melanosuchus » Wed Jan 13, 2016 6:11 pm UTC

So what is the current licensing status for the wiki?

I want to add some pages but I don't want to contribute to non-free contents, so as long as every page is CC BY-NC-SA, I cannot make the changes I want.
User avatar
kharnov
Granger
Posts: 1851
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:54 pm UTC
Clan: GT
Location: New York City

Re: Re-licensing the wiki (without the non-commercial clause)

Postby kharnov » Wed Jan 13, 2016 11:56 pm UTC

Possible compromise: all pages have the old license until they have been edited, upon which they receive the new license.

Is that fair? Does that work?
User avatar
Melanosuchus
Programmer
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 6:42 pm UTC
Clan: Evil Ant Colony
Location: Virgo Superclaster

Re: Re-licensing the wiki (without the non-commercial clause)

Postby Melanosuchus » Sat Jan 16, 2016 10:26 am UTC

I'm not sure it would be legal unless all people who made significant contributions agree to the new license.

We can make CC BY-Sa the default license and add a banner which explains the situations and says that page is CC BY-NC-SA for the moment and if the authors agree or the page gets re-written, it can be removed.
User avatar
kharnov
Granger
Posts: 1851
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:54 pm UTC
Clan: GT
Location: New York City

Re: Re-licensing the wiki (without the non-commercial clause)

Postby kharnov » Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:31 am UTC

I would be OK with this, is everyone else OK with this?
User avatar
Melanosuchus
Programmer
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 6:42 pm UTC
Clan: Evil Ant Colony
Location: Virgo Superclaster

Re: Re-licensing the wiki (without the non-commercial clause)

Postby Melanosuchus » Tue Feb 09, 2016 11:18 pm UTC

Can we assume everyone is OK?
User avatar
kharnov
Granger
Posts: 1851
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:54 pm UTC
Clan: GT
Location: New York City

Re: Re-licensing the wiki (without the non-commercial clause)

Postby kharnov » Thu Feb 11, 2016 12:02 am UTC

I'm just going to ask Viech on this and then I'll render my final decision on the matter.
User avatar
Viech
Project Head
Posts: 2139
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 11:50 pm UTC
Location: Berlin

Re: Re-licensing the wiki (without the non-commercial clause)

Postby Viech » Sat Feb 13, 2016 3:36 pm UTC

I'm OK with this. Contributors could be asked to give their respective OK on the license change on the discussion page.
Responsible for: Arch Linux package & torrent distribution, Parpax (map), Chameleon (map texture editor), Sloth (material file generator), gameplay design & programming, artistic direction
User avatar
kharnov
Granger
Posts: 1851
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:54 pm UTC
Clan: GT
Location: New York City

Re: Re-licensing the wiki (without the non-commercial clause)

Postby kharnov » Sat Feb 13, 2016 3:58 pm UTC

OK. With that being said, the compromise is approved. Go ahead, Melanosuchus.
User avatar
illwieckz
Project Head
Posts: 465
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 7:22 pm UTC
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Re-licensing the wiki (without the non-commercial clause)

Postby illwieckz » Fri Mar 17, 2017 3:58 am UTC

So, what it the status currently? I made some wiki edition recently and I really don't like writing -nc stuff. :frown:
I give permission to relicense everything I write (past, present, and future) in the wiki if it's to remove -nc clause.

Do we have a list of all wiki contributors? Can we relicense each page for which we know all the contributors are ok to remove the -nd clause?
This comment is licensed under cc ​​by 4 and antecedent.
User avatar
illwieckz
Project Head
Posts: 465
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 7:22 pm UTC
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Re-licensing the wiki (without the non-commercial clause)

Postby illwieckz » Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:08 am UTC

If I read correctly: people who said they are OK to remove NC clause on their wiki contributions:


That probably matches a big part of the content. All pages here.
We can probably add a global sentence saying “Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike unless otherwise noted.” and run a script that looks for pages that were modified by someone else than people listed above and add a sentence in the page saying “This page is under CC BY-ND-SA because <insert name here> was not reached to relicense it. By contributing to this page you give the permission to relicense to CC BY-SA if one day the former contributor(s) guys give(s) that permission for their own contribution”.
Last edited by illwieckz on Fri Apr 07, 2017 1:21 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
This comment is licensed under cc ​​by 4 and antecedent.

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest