Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] Version 3.0 — It's Happening & With BY-SA Compatibility Language Too

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Mia Garlick <mia AT creativecommons.org>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Version 3.0 — It's Happening & With BY-SA Compatibility Language Too
  • Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 11:04:51 -0800


On Feb 9, 2007, at 11:00 AM, drew Roberts wrote:

On Friday 09 February 2007 01:15 pm, Mia Garlick wrote:


Just to be clear... In 4b.

If you use a compatible license, you are bound only by the terms of that
compatible license.

The language:


If you license the Derivative Work under the terms any of the licenses
mentioned in (i), (ii) or (iii) (the "Applicable License"), you must comply
with the terms of the Applicable License generally and the following
provisions: (I) You must include a copy of, or the Uniform Resource
Identifier for, the Applicable License with every copy or phonorecord of...

only applies if you go with (i), (ii) or (iii)?

Am I reading that right?

yes, 4(b) applies if you are within the CC family of licenses. the compatible license is the governing license if you choose to relicense under that license.


And from earlier in the definitions:


"Creative Commons Compatible License" means a license that is listed at
http://creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses that: (i) has been approved
by Creative Commons as being essentially equivalent to this License,
including without limitation because that license contains terms that have
the same purpose, meaning and effect as the License Elements of this
License; and, (ii) explicitly permits the relicensing of derivatives of works
made available under that license under this License.

Since the GPL is the big copyleft license and it has source code clauses, if
you are trying to set up the framework, has there been any discussoin as to
how BY-SA might handle this?

there has never been any suggestion of making software licenses compatible with content licenses and there is no reason to start that discussion now. the very definition of a compatible license demonstrates that it would not be possible to have the GPL interoperable with the BY-SA because, as you point out, the GPL has source code requirements, which do not have "the same purpose, meaning and effect" as the License Elements of the BY-SA

Just guessing, but I doubt you will ever get the
GPL to allow conversion to BY-SA without dealing with that source code issue.

It is not going to fly to take GPL code, make a derivative and only realease
the derivative as a binary under BY-SA. Nor with obfuscated code for that
matter.

So, if that is one of the goals, the issue will need to be dealt with.

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





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page