Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Rob Myers <rob AT robmyers.org>]

On 27 Nov 2005, at 22:43, wiki_tomos wrote:

> What 2.0 and 2.5 said was that "derivative work could be
> licensed under 3.0, and 3.0 may include further ways to
> switching to different licenses through creating a
> derivative."

But that relicensing under 2.0/2.5 is limited to a CC license or  
iCommons license with the same license elements, that is with the BY  
and SA elements, isn't it?

FDL relicensing cannot be part of the BY module as it cannot be part  
of BY-SA-NC. The FDL allows commercial use, which would break the  
intent of NC and make the FDL incompatible with NC.

> Creating a derivative of 2.0'd Work and releasing it
> under FDL is not something 2.0 permits to a licensee.
>
> Creating a derivative of 2.0'd Work and releasing it
> under yet-to-be-published 3.0 is something 2.0 permits
> to a licensee.
>
> Creating a derivative of that particular 3.0'd derivative
> and releasing it under whichever license that is okayed
> in 3.0, is something 2.0 permits to a licensee.

Ah yes I see your point. Do the derivative author's rights shadow the  
upstream authors' rights?

- Rob.