콘텐츠 라이선스 열기

Open Content License
콘텐츠 라이선스 열기
작가.데이비드 A.와일리[1]
최신 버전1.0
출판인콘텐츠 프로젝트 열기
출판된현재 버전:
1998년[2] 7월 14일
OSI 승인된아니요[3].

Open Content License는 1998년 Open Content Project에 의해 공유 유사 공개 저작권 라이센스입니다.[1]라이선스를 저작물에 적용하여 콘텐츠를 열 수 있습니다.최초의 비소프트웨어 프리 콘텐츠 라이선스 중 하나입니다.

이력 및 수신

1998년 7월 14일에 발행된 Open Content License는 GNU Free Documentation License(GFDL) 및 기타 소프트웨어 이외의 퍼블릭 라이선스보다 이전입니다.David A 사이에 논의가 이루어졌음에도 불구하고. Open Content License의 작성자인 Wiley와 Free Software Foundation의 리더인 Richard Stallman은 소프트웨어용 GNU General Public License를 만들고 GFDL을 [4]작성했습니다.라이센스 텍스트의 제목은 "OpenContent License(OPL)"[5]입니다. "OPL"은 OpenContent Principlems and [6]License의 약자입니다.

이 라이선스는 Open Content License(Viral License)에 따라 파생 저작물에 대한 라이선스를 필요로 한다는 점에서 (허용 라이선스를 제외하고) 대부분의 다른 라이선스와 호환되지 않습니다.미디어 및 취급 비용을 제외하고 라이선스된 저작물의 복사본에 대한 과금은 금지되지만, 그 외에는 상업적 [7]사용을 금지하지 않습니다.

1년 후 Open Content Project에 의해 출시된 또 다른 라이센스는 Open Publication License라고 불립니다.OpenContent와 Open Publication 라이선스는 2003년에 [8][1]Creative Commons 라이선스로 승계되었습니다.

OPL에 따라 라이선스가 부여된 프로젝트는 Open Icecat입니다.이 프로젝트는 2005년에 전자상거래를 위한 글로벌 오픈 카탈로그로 시작되어 기술 부문에서 채택되고 있습니다.

레퍼런스

  1. ^ a b c Wiley, David (2007-05-06). "About the Open Publication License". iterating toward openness. [The] Open Content License (July 14, 1998), which was replaced by the Open Publication License (June 8, 1999), were the first licenses to bring the ideals of open source software to the world of content. The OCL predates the GFDL (Nov 2002) and Creative Commons (Dec 2002) by over four years, while the improved OPL predates both by over three years. The OCL was developed primarily by me... The improved OPL was written primarily by Eric Raymond after discussions with me, Tim O’Reilly, and others... The OPL was truly innovative in that, in addition to requiring citation of the original author as source, it contained two license options which authors could choose to invoke: one restricts users’ abilities to creative derivative works, while the second restricts users’ abilities to make certain commercial uses of the material. The student of open content licensing will recognize that these are exactly the options that Creative Commons now employs. What may be forgotten is that in version 1.0 of the Creative Commons licenses, Attribution was actually included in the licenses only as an option. In version 2.0 of the CC licenses (May 24, 2004) attribution was standard on every license, and there were two licenses options: one regarding derivative works, and one regarding commercial use. So in terms of high level structure, the OPL was here about five years before CC. ... Actually, the [OCL and OPL] licenses weren’t that great, seeing as I am not a lawyer, and neither was anyone else involved in the creation of the license. The concept was right, and the execution was “good enough,” but Creative Commons (with its excellent lawyers and law school students) created a better legal instrument. As I said on the opencontent.org homepage on Monday June 30, 2003: 'My main goal in beginning OpenContent back in the Spring of 1998 was to evangelize a way of thinking about sharing materials, especially those that are useful for supporting education. ... I’m closing OpenContent because I think Creative Commons is doing a better job of providing licensing options which will stand up in court [and I'm joining] Creative Commons as Director of Educational Licenses. Now I can focus in on facilitating the kind of sharing most interesting to me ... with the pro bono support of really good IP lawyers... The OpenContent License and Open Publication License will remain online for archival purposes in their current locations. However, no future development will occur on the licenses themselves.' ... Anyone interested in a license like this is far better off using a Creative Commons license.
  2. ^ "OpenContent License (OPL)". opencontent.org. Open Content Project. 1998-07-14. Archived from the original on 1998-12-06. Retrieved 2018-10-18.
  3. ^ "Licenses by Name". Open Source Initiative. Retrieved 2018-10-19.
  4. ^ Grossman, Lev (1998-07-18). "New Free License to Cover Content Online". Netly News. Archived from the original on 2000-06-19. Retrieved 2010-12-27.
  5. ^ "OpenContent License (OPL)". Archived from the original on 1998-12-06.
  6. ^ OpenContent 라이선스 갱신 및 몇 가지 설명
  7. ^ OpenContent 라이선스(OPL)
  8. ^ OpenContent는 공식적으로 종료되었습니다. 그리고 그건 괜찮아. opencontent.org (2003년 6월 30일 아카이브)