Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Greg London" <teloscorbin AT gmail.com>]

On 8/29/06, rob AT robmyers.org <rob AT robmyers.org> wrote:
> Quoting Greg London <email AT greglondon.com>:
>
> > If you want to get really extreme, one could always
> > attempt to lobby for a copyleft license that requires
> > that the work can only be -distributed- with copylefted
> > works,
>
> The GPL for example doesn't do this. You can distribute GPL works with non-GPL
> works quite happily. IIRC this was an explicit decision on Stallman's part to
> help propagate GPL software.

I know. I said it would be an extreme idea to lobby for.

> (GPL2 refers to this as "mere aggregation". I don't know whether "aggregation"
> is a US law term or not, but the Berne Convention refers to anthologies, which
> is a similar concept.)

I thought there were some court cases that talked about the idea
of aggregations or collective works or concepts like that.
I don't know what exact term they used, but I believe they
created the concept. I don't know if its in the law, but I'm pretty
sure the courts recognize the concept.

I think the courts created the idea of "Fair Use" long before
the term was put into US law. Not sure if aggregates is a similar
sequence.