[cc-community] Free Art License 1.3 Compatibility

Danny Piccirillo danny.piccirillo at member.fsf.org
Mon Sep 20 15:15:03 EDT 2010


I, for one, was just thinking about this, and would love to see these
two licenses made compatible with each other.

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 13:35, Tobias Oelgarte
<tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hello
>
> I just read the compatibility page [1] of the creative commons license,
> but as for now no other licenses is stated as compatible. Currently i
> took a look at the English translation of the Free Art License 1.3 (FAL)
> [2] and found it to be highly compatible to CC-BY-SA. The FAL has an
> chapter (chapter 5) listing the needs for an compatible license. But it
> requires the CC-License to be compatible as well: "it recognizes the
> Free Art License as compatible (reciprocity);"
>
> Can you tell me that this licenses are compatible or not? If they are
> not compatible, i'm interested to know why they might/are not compatible.
>
> [1] http://creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses
> [2] http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en
>
> Thank you for providing the cc-licenses and best regards
> _______________________________________________
> cc-community mailing list
> cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
>



-- 
.danny

☮♥Ⓐ - http://www.google.com/profiles/danny.piccirillo
Every (in)decision matters.



More information about the cc-community mailing list