Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Mike Linksvayer <ml AT creativecommons.org>]

Evan Prodromou wrote:
> So, in the FAQ on creativecommons.org, and on the "Licenses explained"
> page, the GNU Free Documentation License is recommended for software
> documentation.
>
> However, there's no explanation for why this is so. It'd be nice to
> have a page saying why the FDL is recommended, and especially why it's
> recommended over any of the Creative Commons licenses.

- The GFDL is specifically tailored for software documentation
- It already has a substantial following in that domain
- CC doesn't want to compete with the FSF

AFAIK no other niche open license (non-software) has a similar following 
or organizational backing.

That said, some may find CC licenses useful for software documentation, 
particularly less than free-as-in-free-software documentation (e.g., 
your publisher doesn't want to allow other commercial reproduction).

If you are producing free-as-in-free-software documentation you'd 
probably want to avoid most CC licenses as they aren't DFSG-free, though 
I suspect by, sa, and by-sa are very close.

(I'll see about getting some nuanced explanation included in the FAQ.)

--
  Mike Linksvayer
  http://creativecommons.org/learn/aboutus/people#21