Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: Derivatives of dual-licensed Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike and GFDL works

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: evan AT bad.dynu.ca (Evan Prodromou)
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: Derivatives of dual-licensed Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike and GFDL works
  • Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 11:41:13 -0400

On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 10:52:00AM -0400, Greg London wrote:

> A license is a voluntary surrender of some rights by the author.

Yes, but the author can put some restrictions on how licensees
exercise those rights.

> So I don't think ANY license is a "NoDual" license.

Not even theoretically, you can't imagine such a license? How about
this:

You may make and distribute modified versions of this work if you
license those modified versions under this exact license and no
other.

> And since she can put the work under two different
> licenses, then Bob can come along and apply his
> addition to both licensed versions.

There aren't two "licensed versions" for him to add to. Granting a
license to use a work doesn't make a separate work. There is one thing
with two optional licenses. Bob can exercise the rights granted in the
GFDL if he conforms to the restrictions of the GFDL. Alternately he
can exercise the rights granted in the Attribution-ShareAlike if he
follows the restrictions of the Attribution-ShareAlike.

Sometimes the restrictions in the two licenses are so compatible or
permissive that you can exercise some right and comply with the
restrictions of both licenses. An example would be distributing a
verbatim copy of Alice's work. Bob can meet all the requirements of
the GFDL (distribute GFDL, maintain copyright notices and disclaimer
of warranty) and at the same time meet all the requirements of the
Attribution-ShareAlike (distribute license URI, maintain copyright
notices and disclaimer of warranty, maintain author name, title,
copyright info URI).

Bob can also choose to comply with only one set of requirements. He
might think that the GFDL is too big to distribute with the work, so
he just complies with the terms of the Attribution-ShareAlike. Or, he
could dislike the idea of passing around the copyright info URI, and
just follow the rules of the GFDL instead. He can't, of course, mix
and match requirements and rights; he couldn't distribute the GFDL
with the work and also the author name, but take out all the copyright
notices and warranty disclaimers.

So: you can comply with one license for a dual-licensed work, or the
other license, or both, if the requirements of both licenses are
mutually compatible.

At other times, the requirements are not compatible. If he creates and
distributes a derivative work, Bob just can't comply with the
restrictions of both the GFDL and the Attribution-ShareAlike. The GFDL
requires that the derivative work be licensed exclusively under the
GFDL (I think -- it depends on what "precisely" means), and the by-sa
requires that the derivative work be licensed exclusively under the
by-sa. He can't do both.

~Evan




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page