Thanks Bradley and David,

These are good points, which I have rolled into a Github issue for us to
address here:


Brad Edmondson, *Esq.*
512-673-8782 |

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 10:15 AM, Wheeler, David A <> wrote:

> Bradley M. Kuhn:
> > I therefore suggest two changes to the SPDX License List:
> >
> >  * Change existing Full Names to:
> >       "Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 4.0 International"
> >       for the 4.0 version and,
> >       "Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike <VERSION> Unported"
> >       for the older ones.
> >
> >    It seems that would be an uncontroversial change -- it just involves
> >    adding "International" and "Unported" into the Full Name field.  Does
> >    anyone have an argument why that *shouldn't* be done?
> I agree.
> >  * It *would* surely be controversial to add *every* version of *every*
> >     jurisdiction-specific CC license in the SPDX license list.  Instead
> of
> >     suggesting that, for the moment I suggest that "-Unported" should be
> >     added to identifier for the pre-4.0 ones (i.e., "CC-BY-SA-3.0"
> becomes
> >     "CC-BY-SA-3.0-Unported") so that no is confused by this situation.
> I disagree, for several reasons.
> * Version numbers are normally at the end.
> * In practice, I think in almost all cases what is intended is the
> *unported*/*international* version, since these materials normally go out
> around the world.  SPDX license names are long enough; the "short" version
> should be the "normal" version.
> * This creates yet-another transition problem, and in this case I think an
> unnecessary one.  Many people already use CC-BY-SA-3.0 to mean the unported
> one, so let's just clarify that.
> I actually do *NOT* think it'd be very controversial to add all the
> jurisdiction-specific CC licenses that are actually used:
> * There's an easy stopping requirement: You have to show that something
> was actually *distributed* under that license.  Almost all of the possible
> license + countries combinations have never been used.
> * There are SPDX license identifiers for licenses used by relatively few
> programs.
> * You could create a convention, e.g., <CC NAME>-PORTED-< ISO 3166-1
> alpha-2 country code>-<VERSION_NUMBER>.  The SPDX license identifier list
> could even standardize that as a convention, instead of listing them all
> out.  A few lines of text... and you're done.  E.g., the US ported version
> would be "CC-BY-SA-PORTED-US-3.0".  I add the "-PORTED-" because "SA" means
> "Saudi Arabia"; without some special keyword it wouldn't be obvious what
> "CC-BY-SA" meant.  I suggest the 2-character code, that's what most people
> use.  We could use the "2-character codes as assigned by the Internet
> Assigned Numbers Authority".  The alpha-2 code for the UK is "GB", but "UK"
> is used in domain names & it might be clearer to use that.
> --- David A. Wheeler
> _______________________________________________
> Spdx-legal mailing list
Spdx-legal mailing list

Reply via email to