Colin Steele [mailto:colin / webg2.com] wrote:
> This Terms of Service specifies that user-contributed 
> content is free of legal encumbrances (section 6.f.), 
> and that it is contributed under the terms of the X11 license.

I am glad you were able to arrive at a decision that feels appropriate for
your project.  That's not always easy given the inflammatory nature of the
software licensing issue.  I certainly did not want to spawn yet another
unending rehash of licensing issues.  These memes have already caused
several billions of bits to be propagated about themselves and many fine
minds have been distracted from their creative work in the process.  For
Ruby-talk list reference purposes, only, I am including a few essential
links to resources that summarize and categorize much of what has been
thought and written about licensing.  These links can save you considerable
time when pondering licensing concerns.

* The Open Source Software Licensing Page
    http://www.stromian.com/Open_Source_Licensing.htm
      -- A good summary information site.
* Open Directory (Dmoz.org): Computers: Open Source: Licenses
    http://dmoz.org/Computers/Open_Source/Licenses/
      -- Probably the best available index to the subject.
* Google: Computers > Open Source > Licenses
    http://directory.google.com/Top/Computers/Open_Source/Licenses/
      -- Another index on the subject
* FSF: Licensing Free Software
    http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/philosophy.html#LicensingFreeSoftware
      -- This encapsulates the Free Software Foundation's stand
* FSF: Various Licenses and Comments about Them
    http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/license-list.html
      -- Do note that the Free Software Foundation has a particular bias,
here.


John
grepninja / diganet.com
GrepNinjaLog: http://cyberjet.tripod.com/grepninjalog/