cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses
List archive
- From: Wouter Vanden Hove <wouter.vanden.hove AT pandora.be>
- To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: (no subject)
- Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 23:02:40 +0000
Op wo 14-01-2004, om 19:03 schreef Evan Prodromou:
> >>>>> "WVH" == Wouter Vanden Hove <wouter.vanden.hove AT pandora.be> writes:
>
> >> Is there any of the CC licenses compatible with the GNU FDL?
>
> WVH> 0) I am not a lawyer, I don't speak for Creative Commons.
>
> WVH> 1) Yes.
>
> WVH> * Public Domain * Attribution
>
> Good point, but note that you can't modify GFDL'd information and
> release it into the public domain or under the Attribution
> license. You _can_ take public domain information or
> Attribution-licensed information and put it into something licensed
> under the GFDL.
Yes, this is wat "compatibility" means in this context, a one-way road.
For doftware, a MIT license is compatible with GPL, but certainly not
vice versa.
However people at Wikipedia are unsure wether even CC Attribution is
compatible with FDL.
see
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikilegal-l/2003-October/000007.html
where Jimmy Wales replies:
"Andre Engels wrote:
> As far as I know, this is not true. Creative Commons only allows
> spreading under the same license, not with more or less
> rights. Since the GNU/FDL is not the same license, it is not allowed
> to go from CC to GNU/FDL - or vice versa.
I agree completely. By and large, the CC licenses are incompatible
with GNU FDL. This is a big problem, but that's the current state of
affairs as I see it.
I should point out that no less personage than Larry Lessig himself
told me that he thinks otherwise, for the by/1.0 license:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/legalcode
I never understood why he thought so, though. He may have explained
it to me in a way that I ought to have understood, nevertheless I didn't
and still don't."
W.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dit berichtdeel is digitaal ondertekend
-
(no subject),
Jeroen Budts, 01/13/2004
-
Re: (no subject),
Wouter Vanden Hove, 01/14/2004
-
Re: (no subject),
Evan Prodromou, 01/14/2004
- Re: (no subject), Wouter Vanden Hove, 01/14/2004
-
Re: (no subject),
Evan Prodromou, 01/14/2004
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: (no subject), Evan Prodromou, 01/13/2004
- (no subject), jrmclaughlin, 01/30/2004
-
Re: (no subject),
Wouter Vanden Hove, 01/14/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.