The CC-BY-SA 3.0 "Commons Deed"<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/>states that: "You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor." I thought this meant that some equivalent requirement would be written into the full license (the "Legal Code"), but apparently this is not the case.
Unlike the GPL, the Legal Code does however not seem to prevent us from using it together with additional terms. As you point out, that would of course effectively mean that we are making a new license. So I have to modify my original question to this: would a license requirement "to warn potential buyers that what they are going to buy may be obtained gratuitously from elsewhere" be considered non-free or incompatible with any relevant guidelines? I've read through the DFSG and Software License FAQ<http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html> and as far as I can tell, such a requirement would not fail any of the 'thought experiments' it lists. But again, I am interested to know whether anyone disagrees. Thanks. 2012/9/1 Francesco Poli <[email protected]> > On Sat, 1 Sep 2012 22:36:03 +0200 Zoot Zoot wrote: > > > Hi, > > Hello, > > > > > I'm a contributor with the Free Software game project 0 A.D. (package > name: > > 0ad <http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/0ad>). > > > > We've recently found out that someone is > > selling<http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_nkw=0+A.D.+RTS>copies of our > > game on eBay > [...] > > in a misleading manner, > [...] > > > > For this reason, we have discussed adding an attribution clause to our > > CC-BY-SA 3.0 licensed artwork in the game that requires a seller to make > > any buyers aware that the game can be downloaded for free from our > website > > prior to the purchase. > > I am not sure I understand this correctly. > > Do you mean that you want to add a restriction that requires any seller > to warn potential buyers that what they are going to buy may be obtained > gratuitously from elsewhere? > > Where is the part of CC-by-sa-v3.0 that would allow you to add such a > restriction (without effectively changing the licensing terms [1])? > > [1] something that can be done only in agreement with all the copyright > holders and that would anyway mean that the license would no longer be > CC-by-sa-v3.0 but "CC-by-sa-v3.0 + additional restriction"... > > > > > To the best of my knowledge CC-BY-SA 3.0 affords us the ability to add > such > > a clause, > > I fail to find any relevant part of CC-by-sa-v3.0 that would allow > this... > > Section 4c requires anyone who re-distributes the Work (the eBay seller > qualifies as re-distributor) to "provide, reasonable to the medium or > means [the re-distributor is] utilizing": the name of the Original > Author if supplied, and possibly some designated "Attribution Parties", > the title of the Work if supplied, and "to the extent reasonably > practicable, the URI, if any, that Licensor specifies to be associated > with the Work, unless such URI does not refer to the copyright notice > or licensing information for the Work". > > However, Section 4c does not require the re-distributor to provide all > these data prior to the act of distributing a copy of the Work, as far > as I can tell. > > > and to the best of my knowledge CC-BY-SA 3.0 is compatible with > > the DFSG. > > This is something on which I personally disagree with the Debian FTP > masters: they claim that CC-by-sa-v3.0 meets the DFSG, while I am > convinced that it fails to meet the DFSG. > But that's another story [2]... > > [2] if you are interested to read more details, please see > https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2010/01/msg00084.html > https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/03/msg00105.html > > > > > I would like to ask whether you all agree that adding such a clause to a > > Debian package would be compatible with the DFSG and other relevant > > guidelines? > > I personally do not agree, in the sense that I disagree with the FTP > masters on the acceptability of CC licenses, and I therefore think that > 0ad-data is already unsuitable for Debian (main). > > Moreover, I don't think that CC-by-sa-v3.0 includes the possibility of > adding the restriction that you mentioned. > > > But please note that I am not an official member of the Debian Project > (I am just an external contributor) and that I do not speak on behalf > of the Debian Project. > > > > > Thank you. > > You're welcome. > > -- > http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt > New GnuPG key, see the transition document! > ..................................................... Francesco Poli . > GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE >
