On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 12:06 -0700, Rick Moen wrote: > Quoting Yves-Alexis Perez ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > But CC-BY-NC is not considered > > DFSG-free so it may be an issue (see > > http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html) > > It is considered DFSG-non-free by some number of (not identified) members > of the public mailing list debian-legal, as summarised by my friend Evan > Prodromou. As Evan's page points out, "these summaries are not binding". > > In short, IMO, you just can't go by such things. Or shouldn't, anyway.
I agree with Rick 100%. But! Anyone interested in Free Software and considering a content license should strongly consider one of the licenses that comply with the Free Cultural Works definition: http://freedomdefined.org/Licenses In particular, the Attribution-NonCommercial license from CC (mentioned above) is incompatible in spirit with any existing definition of Free Software. -Evan -- Evan Prodromou - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://people.debian.org/~evan/ GPG key fingerprint: A9EB B297 CD44 24F8 1CF2 69A8 50AA 7015 A876 F581
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
