First Cut

The Sakai code itself is licensed under the Attribution ("by") option, to allow for, and encourage, commercial interest.  The documentation materials that concern this group are sample courses and end-user documents in written and other media form. 

Issues:

1. Whereas the Sakai code is institutional and not subject to copyright, is its documentation, rather, individual intellectual property?  Is it important that authors receive recognition for this work on their campuses?  If so, then the documentation license should be more restrictive, perhaps Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike (by-nc-sa) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/).
     "by":  Because attribution is necessary, on all options, and desirable, for professional credit.
     "sa":  Share-alike, to preserve the open-source status.
     "nc":  Non-commercial, to disallow the sale of derivative works.
2. Will the "by-nc-sa" license discourage or close off consultants' participation and contribution of their documentation, which may have been derived from other materials provided by institutional staff?
3. Should sample courses be treated differently from written help documents and manuals? If so, then perhaps Attribution ("by") is the proper license for sample courses, which would align those courses with the Sakai code.