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: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 09:27:34 -0800


On Feb 10, 2007, at 5:11 AM, drew Roberts wrote:

[cut]


I would hope that, in the cases where CC decides to post a license as
"compatible", that there is a reciprocal statement being made by the
parties controlling that other license.

I thought I just read that in the draft Mia posted.

From Definitions:

(b) "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.

See (ii)? Now presumably (ii) is redundant in the license itself except as a
safeguard? Surely CC will not list it as approved if it does not do so. Or is
CC going to play games with us and put licenses there as approved but we
can't actually use them because they don't meet (ii)?

Actually Mia, does this need to be fixed?

Thinking further, I think it does need fixing. Here is my suggested rewording:

(b) "Creative Commons Compatible License" means a license that is listed at
http://creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses that 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. Note: Creative Commons will not approve such a license unless
it explicitly permits the relicensing of derivatives of works made
available under that license under this License.

a license will not be deemed compatible unless it is reciprocal in recognizing and enabling compatibility. i don't think one can include a "Note" in a legal definition. would this rephrasing allay concern?

""Creative Commons Compatible License" means a license that is listed at http://creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses thathas been approved by Creative Commons as being essentially equivalent to this License, including without limitation because that license: (i) 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."





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page