Documentation licenses revisited

Jake Bowman jakebmi at
Mon Mar 19 17:58:28 UTC 2001

This begs the whole question, how can copyleft and
milder forms of copyright licensing be applied to all

Case in point, the biotech industry's inability to
share database access.  Celera is making a public
scandal by charging public universities big bucks for
access to their genome database, meanwhile the entire
genomics industry is a battleground of competing
proprietary standards.  And proteomics promises to
practically drown us all in proprietary data that's
impossible to interrelate.

Surely, of all the code that should be public, we
should have "source" access to our own DNA?


Jake Bowman Market Architecture
jakebmi at

--- David Johnson <david at> wrote:
> A while ago you may recall that I inquired as to
> free and open licenses for 
> documentation. I chose the FDL at that time since
> the document in question 
> was for software covered by the GPL.
> I am now creating a roleplaying game with some other
> people that needs a free 
> and open license. It may be some months before it is
> released.
> I have come up with a simple documentation license
> based on the BSD license. 
> I realize that the OSI is not in the business of
> approving non-software 
> licenses, but I am submitting it to the list to
> garner comments and 
> suggestions. 
> Why not the FDL or another free documentation
> license? I desire a 
> non-copyleft license for a variety of reasons, but
> probably the greatest 
> reason is that I want a short and simple license.
> Why no "invariant" clauses? I thought long and hard
> about this one, but it 
> turns out that the only invariant sections I
> actually want are the copyright, 
> license and disclaimer. 
> I'm not sure about the disclaimer. It seemed odd to
> me to include the 
> standard warranty disclaimer. My rationale for the
> current disclaimer is to 
> guarantee that that full attribution is attached,
> and the lack of any 
> responsibility for derived works.
> Here it is in "templatized" form...
> ---
> Lore Document License
> Copyright (c) [year], [author]
> Redistribution, publication and use of this
> Document, with or without 
> modification, alteration or translation, is
> permitted provided that the 
> following conditions are met:
> (1) Redistributions or publications of this Document
> must retain the above 
> copyright notice, this list of conditions, and the
> following disclaimer.
> (2) Neither the name of the copyright holders nor
> the names of any 
> contributors to the Document may be used to endorse
> or promote products 
> derived from this Document without specific prior
> written permission.
> This work is a copy of, or based on a copy of,
> [title], copyright © [year] by 
> [author]. Distribution of, or derivation from,
> [title] in no way implies 
> endorsement or warranty by [author].
> ---
> Thanks...
> -- 
> David Johnson
> ___________________

Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.

More information about the License-discuss mailing list