Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Dana Powers" <dana.powers AT gmail.com>]

I'm quite aware of the distinction.  But I don't think the wikipedia article is clear _at all_ wrt beer/speech.  Moreover, I find the association of "freedom" with "what the GPL provides" to be very misleading to people who are not aware of the "freedoms" defined by the free software movement.  It is also quite clear that using the GPL would reduce Emerson's "freedom" to restrict commercial use.  Allow me to quote myself:

"Whether you think these restrictions make the GPL licensing system more
compatible with "freedom" is an entirely separate question.
"

but I don't really want to debate what "freedom" should or should not be.  I simply think that article may very confusing for people who don't already understand the differences between BSD-stype and GPL-stype licensing.

dp

On 2/5/07, drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com> wrote:

On Monday 05 February 2007 01:36 pm, Dana Powers wrote:
> "The GPL requires the software to always be free..."
>
> That's not true.

Yes, it is true. You have fallen into the classic mistake with Free Software
which is thinking that the word free refers to price (is gratis) whereas the
word free actually refers to freedom (is libre) and if you go to the link you
provided, you will see this is how it is used in context.

"The main difference between the two licenses is that revised BSD licenses are
permissive while the GPL is copyleft. The GPL requires the software to always
be free, including derivative works, by requiring the software to always be
licensed under the GPL. The BSD license only requires acknowledging the
original authors, and imposes few restrictions on how the source code may be
used. As a result, BSD code can be more easily integrated into or released
entirely as proprietary software."

Free BSD code can be used in a non-free program. The non-free (non-libre)
program can be given away (gratis) or sold (non-gratis.)

GPL code can only be used in other GPL programs. Thus the code is always free
(libre) but it may be given away (gratis) or sold (non-gratis.) Actually with
the GPL instead of selling, you may say that you charge for transferring, but
it still amounts to non-gratis.

all the best,

drew
--
(da idea man)
_______________________________________________
cc-licenses mailing list
cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses