[cc-community] Strengthening the CC-BY-SA copyleft with respect to code

Maciej Pendolski beholder0x100 at gmail.com
Tue Dec 20 15:37:28 EST 2011


On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Bart Kelsey <elbarto at gmail.com> wrote:
> I addressed that exact point in a previous paragraph, although perhaps I
> wasn't clear enough.  Here's what I said about that:
>
>
> Now, what about something like a generic 3d model viewer?  Wouldn't this
> sort of change prevent a program like that from being distributed with
> CC-BY-SA licensed models?  The answer to this is that if the program you're
> distributing is a 3d model viewer, then that program itself is the work,
> whereas if you distribute a game that uses a 3D model, the entire *game*
> (including the assets therein) are the work.
>
> There's a clear distinction there between a generic application meant for
> viewing any content, and a game where the content is part of the work.  I'd
> appreciate it if we could actually spend time *really* examining this,
> because it gets dismissed out of hand far, far too often (and this is the
> exact argument used).  I don't see where this argument holds water,
> honestly.  You can always come up with weird edge cases for a specific
> license, but in general it's very clear whether a piece of art is part of a
> game, or whether it's just something that's included with a viewer.
>
> Bart
>

To me (if you would look at my earlier posts this month (and one on
cc-licences)) it is all boils down to engine architecture. If an
engine is being written to be as a somewhat generic
game/interactive_multimedia player then there should be no problems:
some small, very high level scripts mixed with data under same licence
(CC-BY-SA in this situation) and a separate somewhat generic engine /
interactive media player / whatever.

If everything is mixed together then it almost asks for trouble (but
of course it doesn't mean that developers should be blamed for their
choices).


More information about the cc-community mailing list