Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Kim Tucker <kctucker AT gmail.com>]

Yes. NOBY is different, insisting on no attribution. In SA 4.0
attribution is simply not a requirement (optional).

Kim

On 2 May 2013 17:20, drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 02 May 2013 06:49:50 Kim Tucker wrote:
>> Drew:
>>
>> Correct. Assuming that "non-attribution propagation" is not
>> disallowing attribution but making it optional.
>
> Perhaps. it would forbid requiring attribution, not forbid giving 
> attribution
> where someone wanted to attribute.
>
> IIRC, I have suggested in the past that some fields might want a NOBY-SA 
> type
> license or a NOBY type license but that is a different matter.
>
> all the best,
>
> drew
> _______________________________________________
> List info and archives at 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
> Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses
>
> In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
> in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
> process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community