Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility open issue #3: one-way compatibility

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Anthony <ok AT theendput.com>
  • To: Development of Creative Commons licenses <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>, Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab AT web.de>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility open issue #3: one-way compatibility
  • Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 18:41:34 -0400

On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 4:40 AM, Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab AT web.de> wrote:
> Should CC just deprecate BY-SA and declare the GPL to be version 5?
>
> If not, why not? Which of the objectives for compatibility would not be
> achieved by this?

It should not: The GPL brings huge practical hassles for stuff like multitrack recordings and graphical art. If you run a project which needs the GPL to have real copyleft, then you already have most of the infrastructure for dealing with that (versioned dependencies, build systems, asset-repositories and so forth), but if you do not, then releasing under the GPL requires quite some effort.

What specifically are the problems with applying the GPL to graphical art?

How will these problems be solved by someone who wants to incorporate CC-BY-SA graphical art in a GPL work?

Versioned dependencies, build systems, asset-repositories....do these apply to graphical art?



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page