[cc-community] CC-BY content usable under GFDL
drew Roberts
zotz at 100jamz.com
Sun May 4 14:18:15 EDT 2008
On Sunday 04 May 2008 13:40:21 Matthew J. Agnello wrote:
> > I meant to make no great point other than to point out that a
> > license with
> > basically an attribution requirement could be incompatible with a
> > specific
> > copyleft license.
>
> Certainly makes sense, I'm just trying to understand how this works
> for BSD and the GPL. The article doesn't say why the two are
> incompatible, only that they are. By my understanding, as long as the
> attribution requirements don't conflict -- a quick skim of the GPL
> text didn't reveal any obvious conflicts -- the final work's license
> requirements would still consist of the sum of all license requirements.
Forgot why, but did a quick look nd the answer is simple:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#OrigBSD
"Why is the original BSD license incompatible with the GPL?
Because it imposes a specific requirement that is not in the GPL; namely,
the requirement on advertisements of the program. Section 6 of GPLv2 states:
You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients'
exercise of the rights granted herein.
GPLv3 says something similar in section 10. The advertising clause
provides just such a further restriction, and thus is GPL-incompatible.
The revised BSD license does not have the advertising clause, which
eliminates the problem. "
Copyleft licenses can have this issue. Does BY-SA allow the addition of extra
terms? Somehow I doub't it. I will have to check again.
>
> Best,
> // Matt
>
all the best,
drew
>
> --
> Matthew J. Agnello
> http://hungryfilmmaker.com/
> < matt.agnello at gmail.com >
>
> On May 4, 2008, at 10:15 AM, drew Roberts wrote:
> > On Sunday 04 May 2008 12:15:55 Matthew J. Agnello wrote:
> >>>> Since CC BY has no license requirements other than attribution, I
> >>>> would think it could be used in any work as long as attribution is
> >>>> given, including ARR work.
> >>>
> >>> There can still be problems,can't there?... See the Original BSD and
> >>> GPL
> >>> issues:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#OriginalBSD
> >>> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html
> >>
> >> Yeah, the "obnoxious BSD advertising clause" seems a little
> >> ridiculous. I suppose there can always be practical problems when
> >> choosing to use content from one license within the context of
> >> another. I'm not sure what you mean specifically by pointing out the
> >> original BSD problem; do you mean CC BY and original BSD could
> >> produce
> >> a long list of authors (or advertising clauses), or other license
> >> requirements that would be practically impossible to follow?
> >>
> >> I agree that might be the case, but I think a user willing to go
> >> through with those requirements gains the legal right to use a
> >> particular work in any way as long as he or she follows all the
> >> license requirements. To clarify, I'm talking about situations where
> >> you use CC BY licensed content in a particular work and license it
> >> with some other license. You might do this because you like the other
> >> license better, or you're using work from another copyleft license
> >> and
> >> have to comply with those requirements. I don't see anything legally
> >> wrong with doing this. IANAL, but let me give my reasoning below.
> >>
> >> Assuming the license requirements did not conflict with one
> >> another, I
> >> believe you could use each license's work together provided you fill
> >> ALL the license requirements of each.
> >>
> >> Let's say we have some content using two different licenses, CopyLeft
> >> and NonCopyleft. Because the license requirements don't overlap,
> >> using
> >> the two together shouldn't be a problem as long as you fulfill both
> >> sets of requirements.
> >>
> >> FinalWork = SomeContent( CopyLeft ) + SomeContent( NonCopyLeft );
> >> FinalWork.Requirements = CopyLeft.Requirements() +
> >> NonCopyLeft.Requirements();
> >>
> >> However, because one of CopyLeft's requirements is that you license
> >> under CopyLeft, we have to do that.
> >>
> >> FinalWork.License = CopyLeft( FinalWork );
> >>
> >> But let's say we're using some content using two non-copyleft
> >> licenses
> >> called NonCopyLeftA and NonCopyLeftB. Assuming the license
> >> requirements do not conflict, the requirements to use these works
> >> will
> >> be as follows:
> >>
> >> FinalWork = SomeContent( NonCopyLeftA ) +
> >> SomeContent( NonCopyLeftB );
> >> FinalWork.Requirements = NonCopyLeftA.Requirements(); +
> >> NonCopyLeftB.Requirements();
> >>
> >> In this case, neither license has a requirement that the final work
> >> be
> >> licensed a certain way. So, we can license our final work however we
> >> want.
> >>
> >> FinalWork.License = ARR( FinalWork );
> >>
> >> So, the list of license requirements might become excessively long
> >> and
> >> practically impossible as we add more licenses and therefore more
> >> requirements, but as long as the final work's requirements has one or
> >> fewer copyleft requirements and no one requirement conflicts with any
> >> other, I believe it's legally possible to use non-copyleft work under
> >> any license you want.
> >>
> >> Again, IANAL, this is not legal advice (only C++).
> >
> > I meant to make no great point other than to point out that a
> > license with
> > basically an attribution requirement could be incompatible with a
> > specific
> > copyleft license.
> >
> > So using the comment I replied to as a rule of thumb for a search of
> > content
> > is fine, taking it as an all clear may cause you problems depending
> > on the
> > circumstances.
> >
> > So, just more of a heads up comment by me for those who have not
> > thought much
> > about this.
> >
> > I could be mistaken as well.
> >
> >> Best,
> >> // Matt
> >
> > all the best,
> >
> > drew
> >
> >> --
> >> Matthew J. Agnello
> >> http://hungryfilmmaker.com/
> >> < matt.agnello at gmail.com >
> >>
> >> On May 4, 2008, at 8:37 AM, drew Roberts wrote:
> >>> On Sunday 04 May 2008 11:26:41 Matthew J. Agnello wrote:
> >>>> Since CC BY has no license requirements other than attribution, I
> >>>> would think it could be used in any work as long as attribution is
> >>>> given, including ARR work. Hopefully the Wikimedia's request for
> >>>> true
> >>>> interoperability will finally get filled by CC and FSF; I know it's
> >>>> been on the table for some time now.
> >>>
> >>> There can still be problems,can't there?... See the Original BSD and
> >>> GPL
> >>> issues:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#OriginalBSD
> >>> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html
> >>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>> // Matt
> >>>
> >>> all the best,
> >>>
> >>> drew
> >>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Matthew J. Agnello
> >>>> http://hungryfilmmaker.com/
> >>>> < matt.agnello at gmail.com >
> >>>>
> >>>> On May 4, 2008, at 6:44 AM, Chris Watkins wrote:
> >>>>> After some digging, I discovered that CC-by material can be used
> >>>>> under GFDL - which is very good news.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It seems strange that this info is buried rather than
> >>>>> prominently on
> >>>>> the CC site, but the source is James Grimmelmann, a law academic,
> >>>>> and it seems like he should know. I added the source link to the
> >>>>> CC
> >>>>> wiki, at
> >>>>> http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Interoperability_between_Creative_Com
> >>>>>mo ns _licenses_and_GFDL#CC-by
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It does seem that there should be some more official statement on
> >>>>> the CC site, from CC and/or FSF - the source I have is a one word
> >>>>> answer on a mailing list (even if it is from someone who should
> >>>>> know).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Chris Watkins (a.k.a. Chriswaterguy)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Appropedia.org, the wiki of:
> >>>>> - Anti-poverty strategies
> >>>>> - Sustainability
> >>>>> - Appropriate technology
> >>>>> - Collaboration for practical solutions
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Blog: chriswaterguy.livejournal.com/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Buying at Amazon, eBay etc? Start at http://appropedia.maatiam.com
> >>>>> and a percentage of your purchase supports Appropedia - at no
> >>>>> extra
> >>>>> cost.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Desperate Housewives essentially functioned as a kind of cognitive
> >>>>> heat sink, dissipating thinking that might otherwise have built up
> >>>>> and caused society to overheat. -- Clay Shirky
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> cc-community mailing list
> >>>>> cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> >>>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
> >>>>
> >>>> !DSPAM:481dd649293907785174857!
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> cc-community mailing list
> >>> cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> >>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
> >>
> >> !DSPAM:481de213104661804284693!
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cc-community mailing list
> > cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
>
> !DSPAM:481df609268781804284693!
More information about the cc-community
mailing list