Effect on derivative works is explained clearly at http://creativecommons.org/about/license/
Cheers, Sean Marco Neumann wrote: > Thank You Prodomos for your quick response. Do you know how the > CC_BY_SA relates to derivative works? And how does the LGPL compare > here? > > Marco > > > On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Prodromos Tsiavos <[email protected]> wrote: >> Dear Marco, >> >> This will depend on the range of uses you envisage for the CIDOC CRM OWL and >> RDF files. >> >> If you wish them to be freely copied and transformed, then the >> CC_Attribution_ShareAlike element is perfect. Mind you that people will be >> able to use them commercially and make commercial adaptations as well. If >> you don't wish commercial applications, you will need to add the >> NonCommercial (NC) element. >> >> In the case you want to allow adaptations (which I would intuitively suggest >> you should), my suggestion is NOT to include the NC element, as it would >> limit the interoperability of the documents with other OWLs or RDFs licensed >> under the GFDL licence (GFDL is only compatible with CC_BY_SA v.3.0. Btw, >> this compatibility has only been achieved earlier this week and has been a >> major breakthrough for open/ copyleft licensing). >> >> Also, all CC licences have the requirement of attribution. To facilitate >> compliance, it would be nice if you could provide some guidance to potential >> users of the files (e.g. if you wish some sort of reference to CIDOC or the >> specific authors of the OWL and RDFs you will need to include them in the >> pdf file or the web-page where they are to be downloaded from). >> >> Finally, please ensure (a) you do not impose any copy restrictions on the >> relevant pdf documents and (b) that you use the CC_BY_SA v. 3.0 and NOT the >> 2.0 where the link is from. Version 3.0 of the licences takes better care of >> the attribution provisions, contains non-endorsement clauses, takes care of >> neighbouring rights and is compatible with the GFDL licences. The URL for >> v.3.0 CC_BY_SA is: >> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ >> >> Well, that's my two cents :) >> >> Hope you finally release it under one of the CC licences. >> >> With best wishes, >> Prodromos >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marco Neumann" <[email protected]> >> To: "crm-sig" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> >> Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 6:18 PM >> Subject: CIDOC CRM License proposal: "Creative Commons : Attribution-Share >> Alike 3.0 Unported" >> >> >>> Dear CIDOC CRM SIG members and associated groups, >>> >>> As discussed today in the CIDOC CRM SIG session we consider the >>> possibility of adopting the "Creative Commons : Attribution-Share >>> Alike 3.0 Unported" license for publishing the CIDOC CRM OWL and RDFS >>> files on the web. >>> >>> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ >>> >>> Is this a good license choice to protect the intellectual property of >>> the CIDOC CRM SIG and at the same time stimulate the adoption in the >>> community and on the Web? >>> >>> Best, >>> Marco >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Marco Neumann >>> KONA >>> New York, NY 10010 >> >> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic >> communications disclaimer: >> http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/secretariat/legal/disclaimer.htm >> > _______________________________________________ > Crm-sig mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >
