[cc-licenses] Is something like "version 3.0 or any later version" allowed?
Mike Linksvayer
ml at creativecommons.org
Mon Aug 27 15:02:33 EDT 2007
Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves wrote:
> On 8/27/07, Evan Prodromou <evan at prodromou.name> wrote:
>> You also can't relicense a work under a new version of the license without the contributor's permission. It's a big hassle for wiki adminstrators or other content distributors to keep track of what license each page, image, or piece of music is available under. If you want to build a whole licensing framework for your software (this piece is under this version of this license, this one was available under this version but now it's available under that version, blah blah blah), you can, but it's a huge amount of effort that's probably better spent building functionality people actually need.
>
> Wise, very wise words. That's why I rather know if there's an
> alternative to that right at start and not when it's too late to go
> back.
>
>> If someone's given the "or any later version" permission, it's possible to just move the whole site forward at once, rather than waiting for derivative-version requirements to kick in.
>
> Site and our wiki will be updated today to reflect that.
I assume you're talking about http://spreadopenmedia.org/ and ... I
can't find a wiki other than a page on the xiph wiki.
You should add "license" to the list of rel values on the license link.
> I still have
> no idea how to "hack" the RDF part to state current and later versions
> of the license. The RDF design is very monolithic and never took that
> into account, and I'm concerned of leaving it as it is.
You're not using the crappy embedded RDF/XML in comments, so this is not
a concern. Not that RDF is monolithic or anything.
>> Ivo, I've greatly regretted not using the "or any later version" language on Wikitravel, and I use it now on all other CC-licensed sites I have. I strongly recommend it to you and anyone else who's managing a large collection of open media with a single license.
This is presumably something that would go into a site's ToS or other
agreement, as it is not facilitated directly by the CC licenses (for
non-derivative works). I have no idea how this should actually be
implemented (and IANAL, so any idea I did have would be bogus), but it
is an interesting question.
Mike
More information about the cc-licenses
mailing list