[cc-licenses] Version 3.0 -- It's Happening & With BY-SA CompatibilityLanguageToo
zotz at 100jamz.com
Tue Feb 13 06:56:21 EST 2007
On Monday 12 February 2007 09:00 pm, tomislav medak wrote:
> drew Roberts wrote:
> > No, not really unless I missed something. What is called for is a meta
> > button that would to me cover BY and BY-SA licenses. It would be nice if
> > some support "areas" were set up by CC for this as well. A Free CC list,
> > etc.
> What would be the benefit of such a meta button? It would again conflate
> different licenses. There was once however the talk of using additional
> color-coding for different degrees of freedom similar licenses offer,
> where BY and BY-SA licenses had the same coloring. However, this really
> is a minor issue.
I remember the talk of colour coding. That might help as well. The licenses
are already conflated under CC itself.
In broad terms, let me ask everyone who cares to commetn on this:
In broad terms two CC licenses are Free, BY and BY-SA. (Let's not get nit
picky with ourselves, if they are basically Free but there is a minor change
needed to be fully Free in your opinion, rather than saying "no" please say
"yes with minor tweaks" or something along those lines. If you think only one
is Free, say so and if you think others also qualify as Free, let us know
that as well.
I personally think this broad classification would be helpful, at least to
some of us.
Sort of like we have animals -> mamals | reptiles. Then different mamals and
reptiles. Sure, all animals fall under animals, but we find it useful to have
broad classes and don't just have all of them under one grouping. (I think I
could possible find a better analogy.)
> It rather seems that what you're pushing for is a definition of 'free',
> maybe something along the line of push to define 'the standard of
> freedom(s)', which some people here on the list are advocating?
It may be but not quite. Certainly, I don't think I would be out of line in
thinking that some people (like me) got involved with CC as a result of our
prior involvement with Free Software. I have made no attempt to hide that
I would like to promote the Free aspects of what CC is doing. I am guessing
there are others who would like to do so as well. I am not asking CC to
formulate some definition of Free. I am not even asking for them to promote
their Free licenses over their non-Free ones even though I think that would
be a good move. I am asking for them to provide a way for those of us that do
want to promote the Free aspects to do so under the CC "banner" as it were.
all the best,
(da idea man)
More information about the cc-licenses