Open Source Content License (OSCL) - Other/Miscellaneous licenses

Lawrence Rosen lrosen at
Fri Apr 18 22:24:38 UTC 2008

> On Apr 18, 2008, at 2:20 PM, Wilson, Andrew wrote:
> > Even FSF, to my knowledge, never uses GPL for any of their
> > documentation.
> I agree.  In fact, the only group I know that uses their source code
> license for their documentation is FreeBSD, since the BSD license
> works reasonably well for both. I'd encourage you to consider that as
> your "default".  If you do need to offer something stronger, though,
> then Andy's suggestion probably makes the most sense.
> - Ernie P.

[LR:] Come one guys! Read the license explanation! OSL 3.0 and AFL 3.0 are
both perfectly fine licenses for documentation. I use them for non-software
all the time.


More information about the License-review mailing list