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/