-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I wouldn't assume that the compatibility will come so quickly. Six months ago I was sitting on a bus in Rio with Jimmy Wales; he said he hoped it would come together soon. I recall having seen the subject alluded to considerably before then.
Even if compatibility of by-sa is established with the FDL and FAL, it will still be incompatible with by-nc-sa. (I think there was an effort under way to write a sort of IF THEN clause into the CC licenses, e.g. if you don't want to use by-sa, then you can use by-nc-sa instead. However, I admit I don't quite understand how this would work, and I'm not sure if it's been implemented yet. Even when implemented, I still think it will be a bit confusing.) I think it is important to allow our work to be used in nc licensed works. For one, a large proportion (likely the majority) of music published under a CC license has an nc clause. Let's say someone wanted to make a video mash-up of our work with some sweet tunes from Magnatune: no dice, if we don't allow nc. I think the status quo, by, is the right solution. The purpose of any material that FC.o creates is to promote its widest possible dissemination. The best way to do this is to avoid all license entanglements. Any restriction greater than "no rights reserved" must be justified in light of this purpose. I think attribution is justified, because it is a truly minimal requirement, unlikely to prevent any potential user from making use, and in fact serves to further promote the organization. I do not think that any copyleft or share-alike clause is justified from this perspective, because I think it will be unlikely to prevent further uses, and see the benefit as being marginal for our purpose. I suppose you could hack a solution by multi-licensing, but that gets messy quickly and has major pitfalls. Nelson, I shake my fist at you for not letting sleeping dogs lie. Gavin Rob Myers wrote: > Nelson Pavlosky wrote: > >> Do the benefits of viral licensing now outweigh the compatibility costs? > > BY-SA is good as it makes a strong statement that you are willing to > share and expect others to follow your lead. CC are working on > compatibility with the FDL, and the FAL people are keen to make their > license compatible as well. So it will hopefully be the most compatible > of all CC's licenses. > > Incidentally, please don't call copyleft licenses "viral", they cannot > infect anything just by coming into contact with it. ;-) > > - Rob. > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF4/tftLXQdLhFpekRAtMTAJ4p2viDgS6/zrZNYb03sscn4/q1/QCeNgYi KhkzPDyP6UN9vObt1K2Vq4A= =gdS+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
