Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab AT web.de>]

At Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:52:02 +1100,
Ben Finney wrote:
> 
> Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab AT web.de> writes:
> 
> > Am Donnerstag, 19. Januar 2012, 10:31:36 schrieb Ben Finney:
> > > > If someone wants their art to be made part of a software program,
> > > > and that program is gnu-gpl, then the art should be gnu gpl too.
> > > 
> > > To the extent that we're talking about works covered by copyright,
> > > and not physical objects, I agree.
> >
> > So you think that none of the existing cc by-sa works should be used
> > in GPL- Programs and no art which gets created for games should be
> > licensed under cc by-sa?
> 
> You've already stipulated an art work whose copyright holder *wants* the
> work to be part of a GPL-licensed program. In that case, yes, the
> intention of the copyright holder of the art work is best met by
> licensing that art work under the GPL.

I mean existing works. 

For the future: If the cc by-sa cannot be adapted to allow for iclusion in 
GPL licensed games, it should carry a prominent notice, that if the artist 
wants his work to be usable in all free games, he should use the GPL, too. 
Because if an artist asks me, "what license should I use" I cannot just say 
"use cc by-sa and you are on the good side". Instead I have to say "well, use 
cc by-sa and dual license with GPL" (after the and it became too complex for 
a quick answer. The artist decided that free licensing is too complicated and 
just sticks to unfree licensing).

Most people just want to do something good for society and not delve into 
licensing. These will not dual license, even when they want their games to be 
available for GPL games.

So I have to tell them "just use GPL, that is tried and true".

Best wishes,
Arne