mikolaj/org:public-domain into main
This clarifies the ToU to accept public domain content, in response to a discussion in Codeberg/Community, as neither the FSF nor OSI consider public domain to be a license.
@ -10,3 +10,3 @@
(1) For Free and Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) projects, the Codeberg e. V. provides various services like a public repository and version control system, wiki, and issue tracker hosting under certain terms and conditions. These services are referred to as "service", "hosting" and "platform" in this document.
(2) Our service is open for all projects covered by a free software or open source licence, as defined by either the Free Software Foundation (FSF) or the Open Source Initiative (OSI).
(2) Our service is open for all projects covered by a free software or open source licence, as defined by either the Free Software Foundation (FSF) or the Open Source Initiative (OSI), or that are verifiably in the public domain in Germany.
"verifiably" how? Consider this:
..., or are in the public domain.
A work is considered to be in the public domain when one of the following applies:
(1) The author has waived their exclusive right to copy, distribute, adapt, and perform the work. This waiver must apply in Germany and worldwide, to the fullest extent allowed by law.
(2) The work's copyright protection has expired under the conditions set forward by the Berne Convention.
(3) The work has been licensed using the [Creative Commons Zero (CC0)](https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/deed.en) license or the [Unlicense](https://unlicense.org/).
(Additional reference that goes into Germany as an exception: https://cr.yp.to/publicdomain.html)
Wikimedia Commons has a quite large list of reasons why a work can be in the PD, c.f. this page and all the linked templates.
Maybe it's worth to just weaken the last bit to "..., or are demonstrable in the public domain", that gives enough wiggle room to cover all of those cases as long as the contributors demonstrate why a certain work is PD?
(2) The work's copyright protection has expired under the conditions set forward by the Berne Convention.
Why specifically mention the Berne Convention? It only specifies a minimum of 50 years after which copyright expires, but the copyright term is longer in Germany's law, and has at least one very special case.
What do we do with this PR now? Four months passed -- it would be good to not have this linger.
Please remind me of this again in a week or so, too much chaos ( => low energy amounts ) happening at the moment.
Is it a good time continue on this pull request now, @n0toose?
@jacobwillden @mikolaj Hey, sorry for the long wait - me and some other e.V. members are working on a succeeding "PR" that will also cover public domain content. It might take some time because we're trying to get it right (but have to propose it to the Annual Assembly and show it to a couple of other people), but there's an effort happening behind the scenes. Stay tuned!
@jacobwillden @mikolaj Hi, we just published #1219.
@moderation see records spam above please
Anyway, apart from the spam, I think it's a good idea to close this given that we made the proposal that encapsulated what this PR was intended to achieve here: #1219
It will be merged as soon as we prepare a public announcement (together with a status update on other things happening within the association). Please let me know if me closing this pull request is a problem.
Locking, this issue is attractive for users to comme g LLM comments.
No due date set.
No dependencies set.
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?