Development of Creative Commons licenses

[M Featherston <opensourcepro AT gmail.com>]

Thanks for the info.

 

Since there is an issue with compatibility between versions 1.0 and 2.5, would it make sense to dual license content to help avoid this issue?

 

Currently, I am looking into licensing a lot of photos I have taken, but want to maximize compatibility of photos for use with as wide a range of Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike Licenses as possible (ie: versions).

 

Thanks!

 

Mitch

 

On 10/4/05, rob AT robmyers.org <rob AT robmyers.org> wrote:

I am Not A Lawyer, I am Not CC.

Quoting M Featherston < opensourcepro AT gmail.com>:

> if I take a photo that was licensed under version 1.0 of the
> Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License, and then take a photo licensed
> under the version 2.5 license, would there be legal or other issues?

1.0 doesn't have an "upgrade clause" so as far as I know you wouldn't
be able to
use the 1.0 work under the 2.5 license. So there's a compatibility problem.

> Also,
> using my example of version 1.0 and version 2.5 being combined, would the
> derivative I create be automatically licensed under a 2.5 license?

You couldn't create such a derivative, so it couldn't be 2.5.

2.0 does have an upgrade clause, so you could mix 2.0 and 2.5 work and release
the results 2.5 .

- Rob.