Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Daniel Carrera <daniel.carrera AT zmsl.com>]

rob AT robmyers.org wrote:
> If I FDL-ed my work I could put my own invariants in to pre-empt this.
> So this move makes BY-SA effectively redundant in favour of a licence
> that doesn't have the same effect or intentions.
>
> It doesn't take a wiki to show that this is a bad idea.

I think the idea is worth discussing. Increasing the amount of work 
available for mixing has a lot of merit. We need to explore options and 
see what we come up with. For example:

1. Talk to the FSF about removing invariant sections from the GFDL.
2. Make the BY-SA say "you can make this GFDL without inv. sections".

Right there we have two options that seem worth investigating further. 
If either can be made to work, it would be better than status quo.

Therefore, I strongly disgree with just saying "obviously it's a bad 
idea" and leaving it. I strongly suggest looking for options and see if 
we can find good solutions to the problems we identify.

Cheers,
Daniel.
--
     /\/`) http://oooauthors.org
    /\/_/  http://opendocumentfellowship.org
   /\/_/  No trees were harmed in the creation of this email.
   \/_/   However, a significant number of electrons were
   /      were severely inconvenienced.