Documentation license

What do people think of changing the documentation license to something else? My current thought would be something like the Open Publication License (http://www.opencontent.org/openpub/), with an addendum to the effect of allowing publishers to print copies of the manual with an "official" in the title if they contribute some amount of royalties to the PHP Development Fund (or are we going to be handing over handling of the money to the ASF?) and contribute their modifications back to us, otherwise requiring them to put "Unofficial" in the title. Since most of the manual content pre-dates any publisher involvement, I see the official/unofficial thing as a way for publishers who "do the right thing" to distinguish themselves, without putting any publisher's name in the title (which is how the Open Publication License structures things). Any thoughts? If people seem to be generally in favor of this, I will do my best to track down all of the various documentation contributors when we have a new license we're happy with. (Note: I'm not one of the core developers involved with the O'Reilly book, so this isn't any sort of indication of what is going on with that effort.) Jim