[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