Page 1 of 1

Wiki's content license clarification

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 7:40 pm
by Banshaku
Under what license the wiki content is? There is no mention of it on the site.

The reason I'm asking this is that I would like to reuse some of the content in my code to help document how some of the nes register, controller etc works. This give me at the same time an easy way to find reference located in the appropriate place.

But if I release that code some day, I don't know if I have to right to use it, if I have to mention a name or something etc.

Who can clarify the license?

Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:04 pm
by atarimike
Before I got the database dump of the Wiki from Quietust, there was no explicit license for posted content, so I left it that way. It would probably be a good idea to start licensing all new posted content.

Regardless of the license, the original poster still owns the copyright. If there's a particular piece of code you're interested in, the best bet is to contact the poster (either through the Wiki or on these boards, the usernames are usually the same).

FYI, I'm not a lawyer, just the Wiki sysadmin.

Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:36 pm
by atarimike
I made a page for new license discussion.

http://nesdevwiki.org/index.php/New_License

Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:54 pm
by Banshaku
Great, thanks for the contribution. Once the license will be decided, we will know how the content can be reused.

Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 5:12 am
by Zepper
There's not much to discuss... on my viewpoint, of course. Here:

- We're a community, not really a development team, each one with individual goals regarding the NES or its emulation. We're centered on reverse engineering the hardware aspects of the NES console in order to improve (for educational purposes) homebrew, emulation or hardware works.

- All the info regarding the NES hardware is a mix of empirical and REing for complete description of how it works. We're not affiliated or endorsed by any company, neither promoting piracy of (commercial) Nintendo games.

Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:27 pm
by blargg
Fx3, anything anyone contributes is implicitly under their copyright (even this posting is under my copyright), thus all the material on the Wiki is copyrighted by many people. Since there were no terms of use stated when the contributions were made, there are no terms of use except what each contributor has stated. Thus, there are no consistent terms for the material. Each contributor must agree to any terms we apply to the material, and contacting all the contributors will be a chore. For a similar situation, read up on trying to convert the Linux kernel from GPL 2 to GPL 3 (the issue isn't specific to the GPL, for all you GPL haters). Some people who contributed to the Linux kernel aren't even alive anymore, for example.

Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:33 pm
by Zepper
Okay, I got it. That's why I wanted to post here though. :P

Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 8:19 pm
by Xkeeper
I would like to suggest WTFPL, because adding restrictions to information has a nasty tendancy of making that information less useful.