[cc-community] "Games, 3d printing, and functional content" 4.0 wiki page
elbarto at gmail.com
Thu Jan 5 14:29:28 EST 2012
The point that some of us are trying to make is twofold:
1. It's possible to write a license that would clearly preserve the freedom
to bundle with other works.
2. Such a license wouldn't necessarily work in all circumstances. As
you've said, even copyright law doesn't work in all circumstances, and some
things will remain unclear. That being said, that "fog" as you call it
would serve as a fairly effective deterrent against "yoinking" free media
and using it in a non-free work.
You're thinking about this too much like a computer programmer. We only
have to draw one absolute line, and that line is making sure that the work
will bundle with other separate works without any issue. If the "what can
I get away with that goes against the spirit of the license?" line is a bit
blurred, so be it. As people have mentioned in the past, the GPL has
exactly the same kind of issues, and yet people don't dismiss it as invalid.
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Alan Cox <alan at lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> I have worked in software for a long time an for software "not clear cut"
> is an understatement. They are about as well defined as the US budget
> reduction plan. So much hinges on history and intent, exact form of
> combination etc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cc-community