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: Rob Myers <rob AT robmyers.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 09:09:27 +0000

On 18 Nov 2005, at 03:35, drew Roberts wrote:

The "Invariant Sections" - how do these affect the remix culture?

Basically unless I'm mistaken this revision would allow your BY-SA work to be made part of an invariant section and thus turned effectively into ND. Yes, yes, I know you'll say "but that would be additional terms on the work". Which work? The derivative work? But what if you are combining a BY-SA work with an FDL work with invariants? The derived work will have SA-breaking features.

So derived works may not use your work in invariant sections. And works derived from those may not either. But the FDL is the complete agreement. So you can't add that requirement.

THIS IS NOT GOING TO WORK.

I'm sure the effect being aimed for is a GPL-style aggregation of compatibly licensed materials to avoid commons fragmentation. Which is cool, but that is not the effect that will be achieved.

Please do not put any back doors into the CC licenses. If I want to FDL my work I will. As it is, licensing my work BY-SA 2.0 means that CC can FDL my work for me. We talked out a relicensing clause in 2.0 and decided it was a bad idea. Which it was. And it is now.

Basically this is bad enough to make me stop using CC-BY-SA if this clause is added.

- Rob.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page