[cc-licenses] Compatibility open issue #3: one-way compatibility
Anthony
ok at theendput.com
Wed May 7 18:41:34 EDT 2014
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 4:40 AM, Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab at web.de>wrote:
> > Should CC just deprecate BY-SA and declare the GPL to be version 5?
> >
> > If not, why not? Which of the objectives for compatibility would not be
> > achieved by this?
>
> It should not: The GPL brings huge practical hassles for stuff like
> multitrack recordings and graphical art. If you run a project which needs
> the GPL to have real copyleft, then you already have most of the
> infrastructure for dealing with that (versioned dependencies, build
> systems, asset-repositories and so forth), but if you do not, then
> releasing under the GPL requires quite some effort.
>
What specifically are the problems with applying the GPL to graphical art?
How will these problems be solved by someone who wants to incorporate
CC-BY-SA graphical art in a GPL work?
Versioned dependencies, build systems, asset-repositories....do these apply
to graphical art?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/attachments/20140507/40e823a7/attachment.html>
More information about the cc-licenses
mailing list