Development of Creative Commons licenses

[drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>]

On Friday 31 March 2006 08:20 am, Greg London wrote:
> > There is no such thing as a "commercial" fork in the
> > accepted sense of both words though.
>
> I was thinking a commercial fork would apply
> more to some CC-NC licensed works, where
> the author(s), release the work under an
> NC license, but also sell a commercial license
> to some company. Or, perhaps a CC-BY project
> gets forked under CC-BY-NC.
>
> In the software world of Copyleft or BSD licenses,
> the term "commercial fork" doesn't really have a place.

What can happen in the GPL world is a dual license where the code can be 
available under the GPL and an "all rights reserved" with negotiated 
exceptions.

I think MySQL does or at least used to play this way. I think they are able 
to 
offer the more restrictive license by writing all of the code themselves or 
requiring some sort of "rights" donation/license on the part of contributors.

Such a game could also be played in the CC arena.

I don't know how much I like it or think it wise anywhere, but it does exist.

> And I'd probably just use "proprietary fork".
> I don't know of any big software projects that
> have non-commercial restrictions. They seem to
> have split into GPL, BSD, or All Rights Reserved.

There are some other biggies and a bunch more besides. For anyone interested, 
here is a link with a lot of info:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html

>
> But with "NC" as a viable option for CC stuff,
> there seems to be a couple of ways you can fork
> those projects.

all the best,

drew
-- 
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/145261
Record a song and you might win $1,000.00
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145