Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] cc-by-sa and gpl

cc-licenses AT

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Paul Keller <pk AT>
  • To: adam AT, Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] cc-by-sa and gpl
  • Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 19:24:04 +0200

On Jul 2, 2007, at 7:10 PM, adam hyde wrote:

Thanks pRo,

When we speak about GPL2 and CC_BY_SA compatibility, we may refer to
compatibility in two directions, i.e:
1. from GPL2 to CC_BY_SA, which is potentially possible because of the
language of CC v3.0, provided GPL2 appears on the CC Compatible licenses
list, but is unlikely to happen (as Paul already explained) because of the
source code requirements of GPL2

Sorry to be a stick in the mud, but what exactly is the problem with
'source code requirements' which make the GPL 'incompatible'?

GPL requires that the licensor passes on the source code with the any binary distribution (very short summary). CC-BY-SA does not require this.
if there was comatibility between GPL and BY-SA then in the direction (1) than this would mean that this requirement does not apply under the BY-SA. this is hardly compatible but at best a way to get out of the source code requirement of GPL. FSF will never agree to this.

in direction (2) (BY-SA --> GPL) this would mean an extra requirement placed on the work. so the two are also not compatible. CC will never allow licensees to add extra requirements on works obtained under a CC license.

also the GPL is a software licenses and the 6 core CC licenses are not intended for software. of course the original licensor can always dual license under GPL and CC

best, paul


adam hyde
'free as in media'


cc-licenses mailing list
cc-licenses AT

paul keller | kennisland
t +31205756720 | e: pk AT |

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page