On 03/26/2014 12:55 PM, Robyn Bergeron wrote: > #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 :) Yeah, my bad. I have my reasons for preferring the NC, myself, but as I said - I'll go along with whatever the project/group prefer. My main point is we should have one CC license content is published under, and authors should know and agree to that when they put stuff on the magazine. As for the magazine being hooked up to FAS - have we been checking that all submissions come from people who've signed the FPCA? It's not automated. Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier | Principal Cloud & Storage Analyst jzb@xxxxxxxxxx | http://community.redhat.com/ Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/ -- marketing mailing list marketing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing
