Hey all, To streamline this whole thing, can we just agree to publish all content on the magazine (and ask authors to agree) on a single Creative Commons license? I would *personally* prefer the most restrictive of the CC licenses (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0): https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ But I'd accept most of the CC licenses. Thoughts, comments, flames?

From: "Joe Brockmeier" <jzb(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "marketing >> Fedora Marketing team" <marketing(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt; Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 10:42:03 AM Subject: Copyright Submission Proposal Hey all, To streamline this whole thing, can we just agree to publish all content on the magazine (and ask authors to agree) on a single Creative Commons license?

I would *personally* prefer the most restrictive of the CC licenses (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0): https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

But I'd accept most of the CC licenses. Thoughts, comments, flames? Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier | Principal Cloud & Storage Analyst jzb(a)redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/ Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/ -- marketing mailing list marketing(a)lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing

From: "Ruth Suehle" <rsuehle(a)gmail.com&gt; To: "Robyn Bergeron" <rbergero(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: "Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier" <jzb(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Fedora Marketing team" <marketing(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt;, legal(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 10:59:27 AM Subject: Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Copyright Submission Proposal On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Robyn Bergeron <rbergero(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > > > I would *personally* prefer the most restrictive of the CC licenses (CC > > BY-NC-ND 4.0): > > > > https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ > > > #2: CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 is listed in > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensingas a license that isn't acceptable > for Fedora. I realize you're citing 4.0 > here, and we don't have guidance on 4.0 in the wiki, but I have to imagine > it's not going to be much of a change. The NC part is still NC... as you > said, it's the most restrictive, and at least in my opinion, > restrictiveness isn't exactly freedom-enabling :) > > > As mentioned on the marketing list earlier, the Red Hat legal team wrote terms of use for us, which croberts thinks must have gotten deleted in a migration/upgrade. But they specify Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/>("CC-BY-SA").

Ruth

#2: CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 is listed in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing as a license that isn't acceptable for Fedora. I realize you're citing 4.0 here, and we don't have guidance on 4.0 in the wiki, but I have to imagine it's not going to be much of a change. The NC part is still NC... as you said, it's the most restrictive, and at least in my opinion, restrictiveness isn't exactly freedom-enabling :)

I guess the question I'm asking (to be more clear): If I get access to publish something to the Magazine, how is that access granted? Am I added to a FAS group, >which in turn provides permissions for access? Or is the addition to the magazine author/editor list done manually?

> At this point its being done manually. BTW, you should be able to use Fedora openid if you like, and not have to store any passwords or setup on the site itself.