Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Anthony <osm AT inbox.org>]

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab AT web.de> 
wrote:
> To cut my previous message short: Do you want cc by-sa to be the
> definite copyleft license for free culture? Or do you want to force
> people to use GPL for art when they create it for a free game, just to
> be safe and to avoid restrictions on their project organization?

I don't want to force people to do anything.  If people want
derivatives of their work to be used in GPL software, they should
license their work under GPL.

GPL is not a bad license for software.  But it's not a good license
for photographs, or maps.

> Do you want one copyleft free culture community where everyone can
> share with everyone?

> PS: GPL cannot drop the source requirement, because that is vital for
> code due to the way programming works.

And CC-BY-SA can't add a source requirement, because the lack of it is
vital for the way many forms of non-software work.

Under the theory of the GPL, a die-cast toy would need to come
packaged with the original mold and an injection molding machine, or
at least with an offer for one at no charge valid for three years.

Maybe the GPL doesn't actually say that.  I haven't really considered
the case thoroughly enough to say.  But the principles of the GPL just
don't apply to everything which is copyrighted.