Licence of VO-DML files?

[Laurent Michel]

Markus,

This is an interesting discussion.

I think I understand that

1- VODML files do not inherit from any binding licence.
2- You would like a quick response because you are stuck to publish your Debian package.

Personally I’ve no problem with waiving my rights on any VO document which is what CC0 proposes.

This question must be answered by the Exec, I suppose.

Laurent
—
Translate with https://www.deepl.com/translator
-- 
jesuischarlie/Tunis/Paris/Bruxelles/Berlin

Laurent Michel
SSC XMM-Newton
Tél : +33 (0)3 68 85 24 37
Fax : +33 (0)3 )3 68 85 24 32
Université de Strasbourg <http://www.unistra.fr>
Observatoire Astronomique
11 Rue de l'Université
F - 67200 Strasbourg

> On 3 Nov 2020, at 12:46, Markus Demleitner <msdemlei at ari.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
> 
> Dear DM,
> 
> I'm currently trying to get DaCHS into Debian main.  This requires
> that I'm figuring out the licences for all the various files I'm
> distributing.
> 
> Although right now, there's no operational necessity to do so,
> because of the various annotation experiments that ran in DaCHS over
> the time, there are a few VO-DML files in the package.  These, right
> now, have no explicit licence.  I'll *probably* get away with that,
> but, really, it would be better if I didn't have to worry about
> getting caught.
> 
> So... can we formulate a policy there?
> 
> My take: VO-DML files are close enough to software that we shouldn't
> use CC-X-Y (see
> https://creativecommons.org/faq/#can-i-apply-a-creative-commons-license-to-software
> for the reasoning).  This would leave a software licence, and then
> we're knee-deep in the various incompatibilties.  Still, I think some
> version of the BSD or MIT licences might work; perhaps even the LGPL.
> The full GPL we certainly cannot afford.
> 
> Or we could go for CC-0, which is compatible to all software licences
> known to humankind (or so I think) and nicely works for
> software-linke things
> (https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0_FAQ#May_I_apply_CC0_to_computer_software.3F_If_so.2C_is_there_a_recommended_implementation.3F).
> It's also what our vocabularies (http://www.ivoa.net/rdf) use at the
> moment (and hopefully even after VocInVO2 is REC).
> 
> So... Do people have thoughts on this?  Action plans perhaps, even?
> 
>         -- Markus

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/dm/attachments/20201106/60a11796/attachment.html>