Website content licensing

[Paul Brown]

On martes, 8 de septiembre de 2020 20:21:42 (CEST) Kenny Duffus wrote:
> On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 19:07:14 BST Paul Brown wrote:
> > On martes, 8 de septiembre de 2020 15:16:26 (CEST) Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 14:43:51 CEST Carl Schwan wrote:
> > > > CC-BY-SA-4.0: this is the preferred license for the documentation but
> > > > it is less problematic for sharing it, but it's still not a great feet
> > > > for sharing it on a not FOSS related media.
> > > 
> > > *.krita.org is currently CC-BY-SA-3.0, not 4.0, but that's just because
> > > we
> > > didn't update it:
> > > 
> > > https://krita.org/en/about/website/
> > > 
> > > We choose this because we explicitly do not want others to reuse the
> > > content without worrying about copyright.
> > 
> > FWIW, dot.kde.org content is licensed under CC By 3.0, as is the content
> > on
> > YouTube (the only  CC license available). I personally favour CC By SA,
> > but I do not have very strong feelings about this as long as attribution
> > is required.
> 
> We have previously on a number of occasions been told by journalists that it
> needs to be CC BY only for them to be able to use. As stuff on the dot etc
> is things we want to reach the widest audience that seems fine

Makse sense.

Paul
-- 
Promotion & Communication

www: http://kde.org
Mastodon: https://mastodon.technology/@kde
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/kde/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/kdecommunity
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/kde