Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Dave Crossland <dave AT lab6.com>]

On 7 April 2012 03:10, Rob Myers <rob AT robmyers.org> wrote:
> Having the Blender file, or the layered image file, rather than the
> lossy video or image files is a very easy line to draw. Requiring the
> sketchbooks that I filled in coming up while developing those files to
> be digitized probably goes too far.

I agree - in the same way that today with CC-BY-SA, PFOM sources are
suggested but not required by the license, I believe preparatory
material should be suggested by not required.

This is an important issue for fonts where the dominant OFL is like
CC-BY-SA; a strong copyleft but without source provision requirements.

I remember in 2003 that CC branded the GPL but today
www.creativecommons.org/licenses/GPL/2.0/ redirects to GNU.org - and
the CC line was that CC licenses should not be used for software
because the GPL should be used for software.

Similarly, CC licenses should not be used for fonts because the OFL
should be used for fonts.