[cc-community] CC-BY-SA for Jailhouse Lawyers?
ml at creativecommons.org
Fri Nov 25 13:52:16 EST 2011
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 8:07 AM, drew Roberts <zotz at 100jamz.com> wrote:
> I basically wish NC was never a part of cc myself. What I am talking about
> though is NC-SA where the NC condition is *waived* if the work is used
> in/with a BY-SA work.
With this scheme you give permission for your work to be used in an
adaptation offered under BY-NC-SA, which I doubt you want.
> I am looking for a way to get a stronger BY-SA for
> photos and other graphical works until CC either fixes the SA license or
> makes a new stronger SA license.
You could state what you consider to be an adaptation, as a licensor.
I've seen this (licensor statement regarding key license condition)
done by some NC licensors, and by GPL licensors, though with each
always by licensors who want to use copyright to suppress as many uses
as possible, while still using the license in question. In other
words, perhaps disingenuously and without a solid legal rationale.
Whatever makes you comfortable. ;->
I'm sure you remember, but FWIW, what constitutes an adaptation (or
ought to in future versions) has been discussed many times on this
list and nearby, probably going back at least to late 2003/early 2004
2.0 discussions on cc-licenses (it is mildly a/be-musing looking back
at those; so many of the discussions are really similar to what still
comes up; would be interesting if anyone were to summarize neutrally
what has been learned regarding each in the last 8 years) including
lots prior to the Wikimedia migration to BY-SA, leading to the
pertinent point 3 of
Please participate in the upcoming 4.0 process if you care one way or
the other, or better yet, have persuasive evidence that one way or
another will be better for the commons.
As some of this thread seems to concern what is possible with a public
license, rather than how BY-SA actually operates -- I always find it
curious to look at how licenses with a longer history than CC's
address any particular issue. For example, the GPL's distinction
between covered compilations and mere aggregation -- phrased in terms
of programs, but I'd bet in spirit translatable to any sort of work.
More information about the cc-community