Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Terry Hancock <hancock AT anansispaceworks.com>]

James Grimmelmann wrote:
> Here is a proposed revision of Terry's excellent summary.  I've cleaned
> up a few small style issues,

Looks okay to me. Notes below.

> distributing free-licensed open source software.  A ShareAlike-type (or
> "copyleft") license will not be effective for software unless it
> includes a requirement that users who distribute modified versions
> publish the source code of their modifications available.

You should either strike "available" or change "publish" to "make".

I also agree with Greg London's comment about patents -- I didn't think
about that. Drew Roberts reminded me offlist also that none of the CC
2.0+ licenses include a warranty disclaimer. So perhaps the last
paragraph should be amended to this:

"""
Finally, all of the CC licenses prevent the distribution of binaries in
TPM or DRM form, which may be problematic for porting the software to
certain platforms.  Some free software distributors object to this
type of clause. The CC licenses also lack any form of patent protection
or legal disclaimer of warranty, which are often considered important
for software.
"""

I also removed an extraneous "such".

Cheers,
Terry

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