Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: keeping CC-SA free

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • 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: keeping CC-SA free
  • Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 19:23:37 +0200

Greg London wrote:

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?

**the**

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.


There are license incompatibilities between all strong copyleft licenses.
Just try to create a text with a mix of GFDL (no invariant sections), CC-BY-SA, Open Publication License (no options), Free Art License,
and Design Science Licensed content.
In spirit they are all the same, but also incompatible.
**** <http://www.opencursus.be/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=104>It's a good idea to be at least thinking about solving this problem.


Wouter Vanden Hove
www.opencursus.org
ww.vrijschrift.org






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page