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: Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab AT web.de>, Development of Creative Commons licenses <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Compatibility open issue #3: one-way compatibility
  • Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 18:51:19 -0400

On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab AT web.de> wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 7. Mai 2014, 18:37:06 schrieb Anthony:
> I know I'm responding to a long post with a short one-sentence response,
> but I just don't get this part.

That’s completely OK ☺

> Why can't you just dual license?

Because that allows others to add changes under the *easier* license and make it impossible for me to integrate these changes.

But...doesn't one-way compatibility do the same thing?
 
My personal rule for licensing is: I want others to be able to use my works as long as I can combine all future versions of my creations with all my other creations.

So you want two-way compatibility. Otherwise someone can use your work, release the derivative under GPL, and you can't merge the changes in with the CC-BY-SA version of the work.
 
Since some of my creations *require* GPL to fullfill this requirement, I cannot release my works under non-GPL-compatible licenses.

Changing the license of art to GPL makes reuse less convenient, but sharealike is preserved.

Changing the license of a program to BY-SA effectively kills sharealike.



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page