[cc-community] Towards a Stronger Copyleft for BY-SA 4.X+
Christopher Allan Webber
cwebber at creativecommons.org
Tue Dec 20 15:30:30 EST 2011
drew Roberts <zotz at 100jamz.com> writes:
>> If we do want to have a stronger license, I suggest that we
>> give it a new name, like
> OK by me so long as current and earlier BY-SA works can be pulled into new
> works with that license. That may be the rub though.
> What does CL stand for here?
I would strongly advise against two different and incompatible copylefts
in the same space. License proliferation is a problem, but *especially*
in copyleft, which by its nature creates interoperability issues.
Copyleft works best when there's one primary form of copyleft in that
space. I think Mike has previously put it well:
The current fragmentation of the universe of free content along the
lines of legally incompatible but similar in spirit copyleft licenses
delays and endangers the point at which that universe reaches critical
mass — when any given project decides to use a copyleft license merely
because then being able to include content from the free copyleft
universe makes that decision make sense. This has worked fairly well
in the software world with the GPL as *the* copyleft license.
Emphasis on GPL as *the* copyleft license. CC BY-SA is currently *the*
copyleft license in the content space... we'll be doing ourselves, free
culture, and copyleft itself a disfavor by fragmenting this space
further, regardless of whether it's a license in the CC space or
I think the best course of action is to get SA in 4.0 right, and figure
out just what that means.
More information about the cc-community