This comes from the Fedora planet, more specifically AdamW:
I may be missing something here (be great if I am), but it seems to me that the content of the Ubuntu Wiki - which contains some great stuff - is not licensed under one of the common ’shareable’ licenses, like CC, GFDL or OPL. Neither the front page nor any of the several random pages of content I checked has a license declaration that I could find, and the “Legal information” link in the footer takes you to the general ubuntu.com legal info page. So as far as I can tell, the license on that page - which is basically “for anything other than personal non-commercial use, apply to Canonical” - applies. That’s a bit unfortunate, and against the open source spirit of collaboration, if it’s true. I had a couple of people check my sanity on this one, and asked in #ubuntu-doc, and no-one could find anything to the contrary.
I got onto this by looking at the Ubuntu debugging procedures page, which is great. We’re looking at improving the Fedora wiki pages on what information to include when reporting bugs on particular components, and it would make sense to just re-use the Ubuntu community’s work here rather than spend time re-do it all ourselves which could more usefully be spent elsewhere. But if I’m right, we can’t.
If anyone knows that I’m wrong here (or can explain why there isn’t a less restrictive license, if I’m right), please do comment. Thanks!
That’s pretty odd, and I’m sure Canonical will clear up the issue pretty fast once they become aware of it. They demonstrated they’re able to correct their own mistakes.
Here’s just one more guy waiting for the issue to be solved in favor of our beloved fedora friends.
There’s been some shuffling around on the wiki, new front page ect… I assume the notification was some how accidentally dropped. AFAIK, every thing on the wiki is licensed Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License. Can’t remember if it was transitioned to 3.0 or not… It used to be on the pages, I’m pretty sure.
Really though, couldn’t he have sent an email? Seems like some thing that could be cleared up pretty easy…. How many Ubuntu folks are reading Plant Fedora?
It would have been nice if you had checked it before just repeating it: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/WikiLicensing
That’s something that Matthew East worked on and the CC approved it.
Just wondering… but what is Fedora wiki license? They want to use material from one wiki that is CC, is their license CC-compatible? Is their “material” copyleft? IANAL, but:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/Licenses
the OPL isn’t that great license (and looks like it’s not copyleft)…
Daniel Holbach: That’s a specification, and one with last meaningful update dated on 2007-08. Not sure what I was supposed to check there.