Quote from: NewLibertyStandard on August 16, 2010, 08:40:00 AM

Quote from: jgarzik on August 16, 2010, 07:48:24 AM

Quote from: RHorning on August 16, 2010, 07:37:13 AM

I'm glad that you've decided to release this under the "same license as bitcoin itself"....

source code patches != documentation

What does != mean? He obviously just misread you statement. Couldn't you have simply pointed it out kindly instead of replying in crypto computer jargon? Gosh, you're so rude!

RHorning, here it is again, edited and with emphasis added... by me. Don't you worry jgarzik, I'm not trying to take credit for the formatting of your copywroten post.

Who is being the troll here? I'm not trying to take credit for the work of others, but at the same time I am insisting that documentation should also be done as a copyleft arrangement.... particularly when the source of that documentation is from a copyleft document too, namely the source code for Bitcoins in this case.

You think I'm being ridiculous here when what I'm trying to do is nail down copyright on something that I believe should be open source, and by tying it up in this fashion through a purely proprietary copyright (aka "all rights reserved") ruins good-faith efforts for the rest of us. Had this software been released under a GPL license, it wouldn't even be a question: a derivative documentation effort like this simply couldn't assert copyright in this fashion.

I guess what I'm asking here is if jgarzik is going to sue my ass off if I try to put together some documentation that includes any of the information that he presented with his own documentation effort by asserting an "all rights reserved" and "Please do not copy my works without permission". I don't feel that I owe him anything other than simply giving him credit, but if he insists upon this demand for permission first, I don't know how else to proceed. I certainly don't want to insist that anybody else using the documentation I might produce must ask jgarzik for "permission" if they want to copy the stuff I wrote.... merely because it happens to include some of this information even if I derived most of it from the source code and my own investigations too.

Since most of this is factual information and other than purely the formatting of the information, it may not even be copyrightable in the first place. In which case demanding permission is a moot issue and unnecessary.