Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: Extra restrictions on derivative works

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Mike Linksvayer <ml AT creativecommons.org>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: Extra restrictions on derivative works
  • Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 12:54:59 -0800

email AT greglondon.com wrote:
your draft 2 sharealike license is no different than
the CC-Public Domain license. If derived works can
have further restrictions added to it, then the original
work is effectively CC-PublicDomain.

False. You can do anything with PD work. My understanding of the proposed draft is that a offering a 2.0 SA license is the same as offering a work under multiple 1.0 SA licenses, e.g., 2.0 BY-SA is roughly equivalent to offering licensors a choice of 1.0 BY-SA or 1.0 BY-SA-NC.

what 'camp' are you trying to satisfy?

I think the goal in offering a more flexible SA is to increase the pool from which a derived work can pull from. We aren't naively pursuing only that goal, or we'd offer nothing but a PD dedication. _Personally_ I'm more comfortable with a SA that that preserves freedoms rather than restrictions, but my sympathies tend towards the libre software world, so that's expected. I suspect most creatives don't harbor such sympathies, and as such it may be worth offering a SA with a slightly different nature. IMHO, FWIW, IANAL, etc.

I just released a perl programming manual (120 pages, several months of work)
under CC-BY-SA, and I would change the license if you changed the ShareAlike license to what you are proposing.
or force it to be version 1.0 only.

I like how you introduce Data::Dumper immediately after hello world. :-)

--
Mike Linksvayer
http://creativecommons.org/learn/aboutus/people#21




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page