Development of Creative Commons licenses

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

Branko Collin wrote:

> Could you expand a little bit on this, especially WRT what you 
> consider to be "free" and "freedom"?

Let's be careful not to confuse Debian's opinions and my own. I have been 
mostly reporting on what Debian says. The definition of "free" that Debian 
uses is that in the Debian Free Software Guidelines.

Now, I did say that CC-BY is more free than the FDL. But all I meant by 
that is that it imposes fewer restrictions.

> (granted, I only looked at the bit about DRM before I turned 
> away irritated).

Then ignore the DRM stuff and read the rest.  :-)
An example of what Debian considers non-free is the presence of invariant 
sections. You an see why. Suppose someone gives you an FDL document with 
an invariant section equal to the entire document. It's already happened.

The ability to modify the text is one of the rights and priviledges that 
Debian and others associate with "free". Of course there will always be 
constraints, and you have to draw the line at some grey point. But the 
basic idea is that you should be able to modify the content within 
"reasonable" parameters.

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