[cc-licenses] CC vs GPL: how to ensure compatibility and compliance
Javier Candeira
javier at candeira.com
Sat Sep 29 02:10:00 EDT 2007
Some time ago we discussed CC vs GPL in this list. Rob Myers convinced me
that there was no problem in software using CC-licensed resources, as they
would not be linked. If I understand it correctly, his argument was along
the lines that a GPL videogame with CC graphics and music was not linking
software, and could be considered "mere aggregation", the same way GPL,
non-GPL and even non-free programs can be distributed in the same physical
medium.
(Rob, please excuse me if I am paraphrasing you wrong, I can't find your
message in the archive.)
This article deals with how to ensure compatibility and compliance between
GPL and "freedomdefined-compliant" CC licenses.
http://www.linux.com/feature/119212
I have only read the article cursorily, but I have already found one glaring
mistake:
> The remaining licenses, CC-BY-SA and CC-BY, stick only to elements that satisfy the free software definition. But to be GPL-compatible, a license must also be a copyleft license -- meaning the license ensures that once a work is made available to the public, it cannot be taken away again. CC-BY makes no such requirement, thus it is not copyleft and is incompatible with the GPL.
(of course that's silly, many non-copyleft licenses such as BSD are
GPL-compatible precisely by dint of being non-copyleft. It is the OTHER
non-GPL copyleft licenses which are mostly non GPL-compatible).
Maybe there are other issues that you the list may want to raise regarding
Creative Commons licensing.
Regards,
Javier
More information about the cc-licenses
mailing list