Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab AT web.de>]

Hi,

Am Dienstag, 10. März 2015, 13:59:27 schrieb Sarah Pearson:
> BY-SA requires:
>   1 creator and attribution parties (if supplied)
>   2 copyright notice (if supplied)
>   3 license notice (if supplied)
>   4 disclaimer notice (if supplied)
>   5 URI or link to the licensed material (if supplied)

Do I remember correctly that all these are still subject to “what is usual 
for the type of content”?

> If you change the work, BY-SA also requires you to indicate that you did so
> and retain any notice on the work about previous changes made to it.
> 
> GPL requires:
>    copyright notice

The copyright notice for GPL normally contains the author, so for most
practical cases this should be equivalent to 1 and 2 from CC by-sa.

So the only part which could disappear is a link to the
material. Given the limited longevity of links in practice,¹ that does
not seem like a big difference.

¹: As example 70% of the links in Harvard Law Review are dead:
   http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/futureoftheinternet/2013/09/22/perma/

>    copy of the license

This is the part which encourages licensing media files under CC by-sa
when the licenses are compatible. Creators of media content might want
to enable reuse without adding a copy of the license (for example on a
postcard), and for this usecase they need the media files under CC
by-sa, not under GPL.

In the GPL RPG project I’m part of,² we use an exception for GPL for
material we create ourselves to allow for exactly that. 

²: 1w6 (meaning 1d6, a six sided die): http://1w6.org — english
   content for example on http://1w6.org/english/flyerbook-rules
   GPL exception which states that a link to the license suffices:
   http://1w6.org/deutsch/anhang/lizenzbestimmungen#fn:linkreicht

> If you change the work, GPL requires you include a prominent notice to
> indicate that you did so, along with the relevant date. It also requires
> special notices for certain interactive user interfaces.
> 
> We suspect GPL-style attribution would satisfy CC licensor expectations,
> but this is ultimately a question for our community. Are there any concerns
> about the application of GPL attribution requirements to BY-SA works?

I don’t think so, but I’m biased, because the incompatibility between
cc by-sa and GPL impedes on my hobby at least twice a month (in
addition to blocking us from combining works from Battle for Wesnoth
with works from Ryzoom, I have to search only content under CC by on
Flickr to illustrate articles).

Best wishes,
Arne Babenhauserheide

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.