Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Sarah Pearson <sarah AT creativecommons.org>]

On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Federico Morando <federico.morando AT gmail.com> wrote:

However, more for theoretical than for practical purposes, I would be very interested in knowing the feedback of the FAL stewards to the aforementioned question. (In other words, given a CC-BY-SA 4.0 licensed derivative work of a FAL original work, is CC-BY-SA the only relevant license from the downstream licensee point of view?)

I have received permission to forward an email interpretation we received from one of the lawyers that is closely involved in stewarding the FAL, Benjamin Jean, in which he answers your question:

• if you modify the work, you have the option to distribute it under LAL or any compatible license ;
• if you choose to distribute under this alternative compatible license, then only this compatible license (and its obligations) will apply (but subsequent users can reciprocally choose to license their modifications under the LAL).

Thus, in my opinion it would be enough to respect CC formalism. It could seems risky but the point is that:

• 1) this option is only open to people who want to modify and share their new version ;
• 2) even if other compatible licenses have different terms, they are good enough to be trusted (I would say that each license have good & bad points, but they are compatible if the sum of these points are considered as equal).