Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Terry Hancock <hancock AT anansispaceworks.com>]

Erik Moeller wrote:
> On 2/12/07, Terry Hancock <hancock AT anansispaceworks.com> wrote:
> 
>>It would be ruinous to the movement if, for example, it became
>>impossible to use (i.e. reference) GFDL, By-SA, FAL, By, Expat, and/or
>>GPL images in a single HTML document.  In fact, in my own experience, it
>>has been generally bad enough even that I can't combine GFDL images with
>> CC-By-SA images within Gimp for use with an article.  We don't need a
>>stronger copyleft than that.
> 
> This can be dealt with by simply prescribing that works used in a
> semantic interdependency must be all under a "compatible license",
> using a similar whitelist that is now being developed for CC-BY-SA
> 3.0. The works remain separately licensed, but copyleft requires that
> they all are _freely_ licensed.

Which is conceptually similar to policy documents like the Debian Free
Software Guidelines which determine whether works are "free enough" to
be included in the Debian distribution.

I guess the point is that, even if there is some possibility of copyleft
binding on "semantically linked" works that it should not be as strong
as the copyleft on truly derived works.

In fact, if such "semantic linking" were to be regarded as an
intermediate copyleft state, then it would be both more consistent and
more useful to include synching audio with video in that category. ISTM
that a person who puts music under a By-SA license would not be
concerned if the music is used with a movie released under a different
(but still "free") license.

Don't know if the copyright laws would allow that, though.

Cheers,
Terry


-- 
Terry Hancock (hancock AT AnansiSpaceworks.com)
Anansi Spaceworks http://www.AnansiSpaceworks.com