[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [gNewSense-users] [Artwork] Is Creative Commons Attribution Share-Al
Re: [gNewSense-users] [Artwork] Is Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license acceptable for Official gNewSense Artwork?
Mon, 13 Nov 2006 10:37:37 +0000
Heirloom mailx 12.1 6/15/06
"Dave Crossland" <address@hidden> wrote:
> More importantly, CC3 will be FDL compatible, I hear
JOOI, where did you hear that? I can't see how BY-SA could be made
compatible without losing the Share-Alike effect, because FDL permits
incorporation of uneditable material (Invariant Sections and others).
[ Karl Goetz wrote: ]
> > Please don't use it for software or documentation,
> Or is it software?
Please use the GPL if you want to use a share-alike licence for artwork
stored as software - that is, artwork as image files like jpegs, or as
Creative Commons has three main problems:
1. most of its variations are wordy and ambiguous;
2. it carves up the commons into several incompatible areas;
3. you cannot promote any of them without promoting the NC and ND
variations, which are obviously incompatible with free software - I
think RMS has commented on this in interviews in the recent past.
> [...] While I'm not that fussed
> about what Debian thinks, since they include non-free software in
> main, it is a consideration IMO.
Non-free software in main is a bug for Debian, just as it is for
gNewSense. The project's failure to deal with this problem in a timely
manner should not discount all of the analysis of the problem. Unlike
FSF, the debian project has published nearly all analysis, making a
substantial body of public knowledge. Build on that work, so we can be
happy it has helped to make another free software OS.
Hope that helps,
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Somerset, England. Work/Laborejo: http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
IRC/Jabber/SIP: on request/peteble