Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Blaise Alleyne <email AT blaise.ca>]

On 12-12-12 01:50 PM, Anthony wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Rob Myers <rob AT robmyers.org> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Anthony<osm AT inbox.org>  wrote:
>>>> And "Proprietary Derivation Rights Reserved" for SA?
>>
>> No.
> 
> What's wrong with that?  SA reserves the right of the author to make
> (or authorize the making of) proprietary derivatives, in exactly the
> same way NC reserves the right of the original author to make copies
> for commercial purposes.

That's not actually true, is it? SA requires that derivatives stay under the 
*same* licence, preventing derivate works from being licensed *differently*. 
It reserves the right of the author to *change* the licence, right?

That means a derivative work can't be CC BY or CC0 (or GNU GPL, or the 
Artistic License) or, yes, under a non-free license. It's not just preventing 
proprietary reuse, but also preventing the addition (GNU GPL -- source 
requirements) or subtraction (CC BY, CC0) of restrictions, whether within 
libre or not.