[cc-licenses] Aggregation and Stronger SA
zotz at 100jamz.com
Thu Apr 19 14:15:01 EDT 2012
On Wednesday 18 April 2012 16:05:24 Francesco Poli wrote:
> > In both instances, you may need to name all acceptable licenses or have
> > some trusted group to name future additions to the list. In the first
> > instance the list would be very restricted and limited to the license
> > itself or truly compatible copyleft licenses. In the second instance, the
> > list would be much larger and would include Free copyleft and permissive
> > licenses.
> You are not saying something too different from what I said:
> I acknowledged that a copyleft license could mandate the adoption of one
> out of a limited set of alternative licenses.
> Whether the list of alternative licenses is spelled out in the license
> text (better)
In one way certainly, but not necessarily for future proofing.
> or maintained externally by a trusted group (dangerous,
> licensors won't be able to know upfront which permissions they are
> really granting, since the list of alternative licenses may change in
> time in an unpredictable way...)
Certainly, but we have to trust the FSF to keep the GPL "right" now if we go
with the any future version option.
> is an implementation detail (an
> important detail, but still...).
There are benefits and costs either way you do it.
I think the only way around it would be to enact copyleft into law worldwide.
Make all works default copyleft. Make those who want a copyright instead of a
copyleft mark their works as copyright.
That should fix the need for trying to find workarounds for copyleft
all the best,
More information about the cc-licenses