Development of Creative Commons licenses

[wiki_tomos <wiki_tomos AT inter7.jp>]

(Please note that I am not a lawyer.)

Have you thought about introducing a meta-license for that specific purpose?

Say, when people declare dual-licensing of their contributions, they state: 

"All my contributions to this site are under both GNU Free Documentation 
License version 1.1 or any later version, or Creative Commons 
Attribution-Share Alike 1.0. In addition, if you use my contribution 
in a way that would meet requirements of both GNU Free Documentation 
License of version 1.1 or Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 1.0, 
then I do hereby permit you to dual license the work created as a result
in the same set of licenses, GNU Free Documentation License version 1.1 
and Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 1.0. If you combine my work 
with any other work that is dual licensed under GNU Free Documentation 
License of version 1.1 or any later version, and Creative Commons Attribution 
Share Alike 1.0, then I hereby permit you to dual license the work created 
as a result." 

How does that sound? Details need to be hammered out, but the idea is clear, 
I hope. The last part is like a third license, or a meta-license, 
that allows licensee to dual-license a derivative work. 

Also, an interesting question related to this issue is if we have to 
choose one license out of two even when we want to simply reproduce 
a work. If the answer is yes, in order to make sure the reproduced 
work is not dual-licensed, we have to make some changes such as: 
1) remove one of the two license notices from the work
2) If you have not chosen GFDL, you would need to remove the license text 
of the GFDL from the work, because it is a copyrighted work. 

My feeling is that it is more reasonable to think that simple 
reproduction could be done keeping the dual-licensed status of the work. 
I did not make any use that violates either of the licenses, except possibly 
for the exclusivity clause that has been the focus of this discussion. 


Well, but again, I am not a lawyer, and I could be wrong. 


regards, 

Tomos