Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] Discussion Draft - Proposed License Amendment to Avoid Content Ghettos in the Commons

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: paul keller <paul AT waag.org>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Discussion Draft - Proposed License Amendment to Avoid Content Ghettos in the Commons
  • Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 12:17:04 +0530

dear mia et all,

i agree with the other reactions on this list that including the possibility of relicensing under GFDL is an extremely important step for creative commons. i do not have to add too much to the discussion about the new possibility to relicense under GFDL. i do however have a few remarks concerning the other three relicensing provisions and how they affect compatibility:

the proposed license provision reads:

You may distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally perform a Derivative Work only under the terms of: (i) this License; (ii) a later version of this License with the same License Elements as this License; (iii) a Creative Commons iCommons license that contains the same License Elements as this License (e.g. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 Japan)

assuming this is the text of the US/generic license it is fine as it allows relicensing under the US/generic version and the localized iCommons versions of the same license. if this gets literally translated into a icommons license it will not allow for sharing works obtained under that license under the terms of the generic/US version. this can be solved in the translation process by changing the license text but i think this is not really desirable.

the best solution would probably to end differentiating between the US/generic version and iCommons licenses. (the language does need to be changed anyway given the recent repurposing of the 'icommons' label). i guess it makes more sense to call all licenses creative commons licenses. and change the above quote to the following:

You may distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally perform a Derivative Work only under the terms of: (i) this License; (ii) a later version of this License with the same License Elements as this License; (iii) a Creative Commons ported to another Jurisdiction license that contains the same License Elements as this License (e.g. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 Japan)

all the best from bangalore,
paul keller

--
waag society / for old and new media
e: paul AT waag.org | t: +91 99 45754172






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page