Free Documentation License
ml at creativecommons.org
Thu Dec 4 16:39:22 EST 2003
Evan Prodromou wrote:
> So, in the FAQ on creativecommons.org, and on the "Licenses explained"
> page, the GNU Free Documentation License is recommended for software
> However, there's no explanation for why this is so. It'd be nice to
> have a page saying why the FDL is recommended, and especially why it's
> recommended over any of the Creative Commons licenses.
- The GFDL is specifically tailored for software documentation
- It already has a substantial following in that domain
- CC doesn't want to compete with the FSF
AFAIK no other niche open license (non-software) has a similar following
or organizational backing.
That said, some may find CC licenses useful for software documentation,
particularly less than free-as-in-free-software documentation (e.g.,
your publisher doesn't want to allow other commercial reproduction).
If you are producing free-as-in-free-software documentation you'd
probably want to avoid most CC licenses as they aren't DFSG-free, though
I suspect by, sa, and by-sa are very close.
(I'll see about getting some nuanced explanation included in the FAQ.)
More information about the cc-licenses