[cc-community] A case against CC-BY-SA 4.0 -> GPL
zotz at 100jamz.com
Thu Dec 15 08:31:45 EST 2011
On Thursday 15 December 2011 02:00:14 Mike Linksvayer wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Maciej Pendolski
> <beholder0x100 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Assuming that an opt-out mechanism would be in place, what would it mean
> > if CC-BY-SA-licenced content would be based in parts upon CC-BY content?
> > Would CC-BY content be "promoted" to CC-BY-SA and then to GPL? Or would
> > CC-BY content be still under same licence and only CC-BY-SA would be
> > changed to GPL leading to incompatibility?
> > In that debate I have mentioned before (GPL->BSD) it was argued (I'm not
> > sure if rightly) that a driver was not changed "enough" so it was illegal
> > to licence it under GPL. Could CC-BY content be directly "promoted" to
> > CC-BY-SA or not?
> > Lastly, CC-BY-SA content creators could opt out, CC-BY content creators
> > could not. I'm not sure that this would be a problem to anyone but I'm
> > just trying to find holes in everything.
> I don't see why CC-BY licensors would object;
You would think so wouldn't you. But I seem to recall BSD objections to BSD
code being used in GPL code. Funny how we go as humans.
> they've agreed to allow
> their works used in unmitigated copyright adaptations, or any terms
> more restrictive than CC-BY. To the extent CC-BY is currently
> incompatible with GPL, it would be a (maybe) minor issue of alignment
> (which would need to be addressed if any form of compatibility were
> desired) not question of licensor intent.
> (Therefore whether CC-BY works first incorporated into CC-BY-SA
> doesn't provide an additional use case, with respect to CC-BY and
all the best,
More information about the cc-community