[cc-community] public performance and GPL
zotz at 100jamz.com
Wed Jan 11 08:19:54 EST 2012
On Tuesday 10 January 2012 21:50:54 Anthony wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Richard Fontana <rfontana at redhat.com>
> > I'm now more convinced than I was yesterday that GPL(v2/v3)
> > should be avoided for non-software works.
> Unless you want your non-software work to be used in a GPL program.
> And if you want your non-software work to be both used in GPL programs
> and used outside of GPL programs, especially if you want it to be
> usable in non-digital form, then you should probably dual license it
> GPL and CC-something.
Perhaps, but until we spend some serious brainstorming time looking for better
solutions, I am not willing to accept that dual licensing is the right way.
Does the FSF take the "needs" of non-code Freedom into account when drafting
the GPL? Until they do, I think the GPL should be treated warily with respect
to Freedom of art.
Is there a reason I am getting no real discussion on the thought of drafting
copyleft licenses so that parts from various works under various licenses can
intermingle while remaining distinct? Trying for analogies here:
Like raisins and almonds in a bowl of gelatin?
all the best,
More information about the cc-community