Page MenuHomePhabricator

Clarify source and content license terms on website (not just in git repo README)
Closed, ResolvedPublicBUG REPORT

Description

In T308236, it is claimed that Developer portal is under GNU GPLv3+ for code and CC-BY-SA 3.0 for text. But on https://developer-portal.wmcloud.org itself, in the footer, I can see

Copyright © 2022 Wikimedia Foundation and contributors

and no mention of free license that I can find, which suggests that the portal is under all rights reserved.

The portal should either be updated to reflect a free license or potentially be moved elsewhere as being unfree it violates Cloud Services Terms of use.

Event Timeline

also the footer needs a link to source repo and many source files that say All Rights Reserved in header need fixing.

and while we're at it might as well add a note to COPYING to mention that some are actually CC not GPL. or make a LICENSE file. idk exactly what the convention is but certainly it's possible someone could read COPYING and miss the note at end of README.md

bd808 renamed this task from Developer portal seems to have an unfree license to Clarify source and content license terms on website (not just in git repo README).May 13 2022, 4:18 PM
bd808 changed the subtype of this task from "Task" to "Bug Report".May 13 2022, 4:52 PM

Change 791682 had a related patch set uploaded (by Alex Paskulin; author: Alex Paskulin):

[wikimedia/developer-portal@main] content: Add licensing information from README

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/791682

Change 791682 merged by jenkins-bot:

[wikimedia/developer-portal@main] content: Add licensing information from README

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/791682

also the footer needs a link to source repo

Links to the source code and other information about operating and contributing to the project is available at https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Developer_Portal which is linked from the About page (https://developer-portal.wmcloud.org/get-help/about/). There is no strict requirement for a prominent link to the site's source code on each content page.

many source files that say All Rights Reserved in header need fixing.

These files have a header of the form:

# Copyright (c) 2022 Wikimedia Foundation and contributors.
# All Rights Reserved.
#
# This file is part of Wikimedia Developer Portal.                              
#
# Wikimedia Developer Portal is free software: you can redistribute it and/or
# modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
# the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or (at your
# option) any later version.
#
# Wikimedia Developer Portal is distributed in the hope that it will be
# useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General
# Public License for more details.
#
# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along with
# Wikimedia Developer Portal.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.

This asserts that the Wikimedia Foundation and the individual contributors to that file jointly own the copyright of the work. The "All Rights Reserved." statement is arguably redundant as this is the default for copyright protections, meaning nobody can do anything with your work without your express permission, or a license to do so. Then an explicit license indication is given declaring that this work can be redistributed and modified according to the terms of the GNU General Public License v3 or later. This formulation may seem strange to some, but it is a valid method of licensing source code.

idk exactly what the convention is but certainly it's possible someone could read COPYING and miss the note at end of README.md

It's certainly even more possible that modifying the GPL-3.0-or-later license in COPYING will confuse automated license checks and also be missed by most humans. I do not agree that we need to take measures beyond the mention in the README, site footer, and site about pages to disclose the content license.

I'd say we are fine here and that this task can be resolved. There is now info in the footer and in the About section.

Boldly closing. While I disagree with linking to a source repo in the footer, we now list the licenses in the footer.