cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses
List archive
Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility with the Free Art License
- From: Luis Villa <luis AT tieguy.org>
- To: Development of Creative Commons licenses <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility with the Free Art License
- Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2011 09:21:59 -0800
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Rob Myers <rob AT robmyers.org> wrote:
> On 23/12/11 19:05, Valentin Villenave wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Rob Myers <rob AT robmyers.org> wrote:
>>> I think LAL 1.3 is more than good enough in itself and close enough to
>>> BY-SA that compatibility is something that could be considered now.
>>
>> BTW Rob, still waiting for that "FAL weakens copyleft" blog post of yours
>> :-)
>
> It may have evaporated. The concerns I had are addressed by 1.3 as far
> as I can tell. Yes, I hadn't looked at it for a while... :-)
Possibly a dumb question, but what are the salient features of
FAL/LAL? Why would one use it instead of CC-SA?
Luis
-
[cc-licenses] Compatibility with the Free Art License,
Antoine Pitrou, 12/23/2011
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility with the Free Art License,
Rob Myers, 12/23/2011
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility with the Free Art License,
Valentin Villenave, 12/23/2011
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility with the Free Art License,
Rob Myers, 12/23/2011
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility with the Free Art License,
Luis Villa, 12/24/2011
- Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility with the Free Art License, Valentin Villenave, 12/24/2011
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility with the Free Art License,
Luis Villa, 12/24/2011
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility with the Free Art License,
Rob Myers, 12/23/2011
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility with the Free Art License,
Valentin Villenave, 12/23/2011
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility with the Free Art License,
Rob Myers, 12/23/2011
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.