documentation

[David Johnson]

On Thursday 23 August 2001 12:03 pm, email at greglondon.com wrote:
> I'm looking for an open-source license for some documentation.
> It would follow the definition of open-source given here:
>
> http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.html
>
> I would be looking for a license that does not allow
> item #3 (Derived Works), but would allow #4 (Distribution
> of patch files with source).

The OSI does not approve documentation licenses, only software licenses.

Most "free" documentation licenses are quite complicated and convoluted. This 
is primarily due to the fact that they are trying to make them as free/open 
as possible without risking the work's or author's artistic integrity. By 
requiring derivations to be distributed as patches, you can cut through a lot 
of this clutter, and end up with a simple license if you work it right.

I would look at the QPL software license as a starting point.

-- 
David Johnson
___________________
http://www.usermode.org