[cc-licenses] Is BY-ND a good choice for an Internet ¡Hello! ¿How fare you? Firstly CC is a jack of all trades, but master of none. Secondly, CC-BY-ND could make it impossible for anyone but your friend to improve it. This is what I would do: GPL it and if you want multilicense it under CC-BY-SA and GFDL with no invariant sections too for good measure. That would ensure that other could build on it, if they make their changes freely available s that others could freely implement them. Here is more specific information: *-<HTTP://WikiPedia.org/wiki/GPL> *-<HTTP://WikiPedia.Org/wiki/GFDL> Remember that the essential license is the GPL. The others are just nice extras to use too. ¡Peace! -- "Ŭalabio‽" <Walabio at MacOSX.Com> The first Intactivistic wiki on Earth devoted to Genital Integrity: *-<HTTP://PeaceFulBeginnings.Org/>
Ŭalabio‽
Walabio at MacOSX.Com
Wed Jan 24 19:34:19 EST 2007
¡Hello!
¿How fare you?
Firstly CC is a jack of all trades, but master of none. Secondly,
CC-BY-ND could make it impossible for anyone but your friend to
improve it. This is what I would do:
GPL it and if you want multilicense it under CC-BY-SA and GFDL with
no invariant sections too for good measure. That would ensure that
other could build on it, if they make their changes freely available
s that others could freely implement them. Here is more specific
information:
* - <HTTP://WikiPedia.org/wiki/GPL>
* - <HTTP://WikiPedia.Org/wiki/GFDL>
Remember that the essential license is the GPL. The others are just
nice extras to use too.
¡Peace!
--
"Ŭalabio‽" <Walabio at MacOSX.Com>
The first Intactivistic wiki on Earth devoted to Genital Integrity:
* - <HTTP://PeaceFulBeginnings.Org/>
More information about the cc-licenses
mailing list