Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Greg London" <email AT greglondon.com>]

Evan Prodromou said:
>>>>>> "NP" == Nelson Pavlosky <npavlos1 AT swarthmore.edu> writes:
>
>     NP> I vaguely remember at some point in the past somebody said
>     NP> that in the CC 2.0 licenses it would be possible to mix
>     NP> Share-alike content under different licenses by using the most
>     NP> restrictive license of the lot?  Is this true?

> It was true for the 2.0 draft versions. I don't know if it will be in
> the final versions or not. The impression I got from discussion on
> this list is that remixable works are more important than anything,
> and one upstream author's ideas about preserving restrictions are more
> important than another author's ideas about preserving freedoms.

ShareAlike should be exclusive. Incompatibility only arises when
people use a GiftEconomy license like ShareAlike and then put
MarketEconomy restrictions on the work like NonCommercial or EduOnly.
I'm not sure how it could be worded, but the ShareAlike license
should prohibit any other restrictions being placed on teh work.
At the very least, CC should not generate a license that allows
this mix and match approach.

The proposed 2.0 solution to allow mix and match will solve the
incompatibility problem at the expense of killing the main
GiftEconomy license offered by CC.