Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Daniel Carrera <dcarrera AT math.umd.edu>]

Todd A. Jacobs wrote:

> What about the GNU FDL? It was designed for software manuals, especially
> software manuals for free software. Is there some reason you'd prefer
> the CC licenses over the FDL?

Yes, there are concerns. One practical concern is that it's not one of the 
allowed licenses at OpenOffice.org. That doesn't mean "we hate it". 
Rather, OOo keeps a (very short) list of approved license, and expanding 
it is like pulling teeth.

Traditionally, the only license allowed for documentation was Sun's Public 
Documentation License. The community council recently approved the CC-BY 
license, and I'm seizing the opportunity to pick something better.

There are also freedom-related issues. The CC-BY license is A LOT more 
free than the GNU FDL. Debian has major issues with it. Enough to merit a 
position statement:

http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.xhtml

Contrast this with the CC-BY, where Debian feels that it is "almost" free. 
They agree that the intent is obviously "free". And they are just 
concerned about some details of word choice.

Cheers,
-- 
Daniel Carrera          | I don't want it perfect,
Join OOoAuthors today!  | I want it Tuesday.
http://oooauthors.org   |