[cc-licenses] SA Section 2(a)(5) uncontroversial

Parker Higgins parkerhiggins at gmail.com
Tue Sep 17 00:33:19 EDT 2013

There is a change in d4 to the ShareAlike clause that as I read it, allows
downstream users to refer only to the "Adapter's license," and not the sum
of licenses for the works in the Adapted Material. In practice all such
licenses are likely to be similar or identical, with the only difference
being that the Adapter may be using a later version (or, if I'm reading
correctly, a Compatible License).

This seems like a sensible change to me; I agree with CC's evaluation that
such a change should be uncontroversial. The only point of possible
controversy I see stems from Francesco Poli's line of inquiry about
compatible licenses: say CC is somehow less than fully diligent about
selecting or vetting Compatible Licenses, and the Adapter's license is one
of these inadequate choices from this list.

Even in that (extraordinary) case, though, that's not a burden for this
license to carry. All that would mean is that further downstream users may
or may not be able to avail themselves of this reasonable clause, depending
on its inclusion in the Compatible License, and may have to parse more than
one license.

Good idea, well executed, as far as I can tell.


parker higgins
san francisco, ca


gmail / gchat: parkerhiggins at gmail.com
twitter / identi.ca: @xor

please consider software freedom before reading this e-mail on a
proprietary platform
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/attachments/20130916/f78578cb/attachment.html 

More information about the cc-licenses mailing list