Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Björn Terelius <bjorn.terelius AT gmail.com>]

I agree with Joachim Durchholz, it would be great if the Creative 
Commons made adaptations for software. I can't understand why some of 
you guys dislike the idea so much. After all, why should it be possible 
for an artist to release their creations as ND but not possible for a 
programmer based on some loosely defined "ethical principle" of open 
source. The Creative Commons are not the same as FSF and does not have 
to share the FSFs opinions. I think that the programmer should have the 
freedom to choose the license he sees fit for his project, even if it 
isn't open source. That a ND licence for software would "cause needless 
division, friction and incompatibility" is simply not true. The 
incompatibility already exists. Just search the net for "freeware" and 
you will find thousands of  gratis but non-free programs. 
www.freewarehome.com alone claim to have more than 4500 programs for 
download, each probably with its own license.

Regards
Bjorn Terelius

Erik Moeller skrev:
> On 4/23/07, Joachim Durchholz <jo AT durchholz.org> wrote:
>   
> > However, they aren't applicable to all situations. The GPL is
> > Attribution/Derivative/Share-Alike, the LGPL is Attribution/Derivative.
> > There's no option for Noncommercial or No-Derivative.
> >
> > I think cc.org could help here.
> >     
>
> If by "help" you mean "cause needless division, friction and
> incompatibility", then yes ;-). Even if one buys into the notion that
> there are different "sharing cultures" around culture as a whole, the
> open source/free software movement has clearly converged on a high
> standard of freedom. The success stories of Apache, Linux, MySQL, and
> so on would have been impossible without commercial use rights. If you
> want to create a new fringe movement, I don't think it is the role of
> CC to support that.
>
>
>