[cc-licenses] Draft 4 discussion period: license drafts and open issues

Rob Myers rob at robmyers.org
Tue Sep 17 20:40:25 EDT 2013


On 16/09/13 10:03 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> 
>> Attribution:
>> In the Attribution section, the URI requirement now more closely resembles
>> 3.0, in that URIs must be retained if supplied with the licensed material.
>> The requirement to indicate modifications is now independent of the URI
>> requirement, and indications of prior modifications to a licensed work must
>> also be retained.
> 
> The URI requirement privileges hosting providers by allowing them to
> terms-of-service affix an effective advertisement onto works. 

I'm torn. This ability has been there since 2.5, and exists as I
understand it to avoid burdensome attribution for Wikis.

But as an advertising attachment exploit it is clearly unacceptable.

There's a difference between contributing work to a massively
collaborative project and using (to take CC's example) an image hosting
service. Can this be made clear in the license?



More information about the cc-licenses mailing list