Thanks for the URL Sean :)
The major difference is that LGPL is for software, whereas the CC licences
for documents. The GFDL is the one closest to the CC licences, but with the
latest developments, it practically does not make any difference whether you
choose GFDL or CC_BY_SA v.3.0. I would still go for the CC licences as they
do not have some of the cumbersome conditions of the GFDL and are easier to
understand.
best,
Prodromos
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sean Gillies" <[email protected]>
To: "crm-sig" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2008 10:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] CIDOC CRM License proposal: "Creative Commons :
Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported"
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
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications
disclaimer: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/secretariat/legal/disclaimer.htm
