Those are some great suggestions, Yogesh. I have a little nit picking for you just because I like to see precise language when we talk about licenses. :-)
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Yogesh Girikumar <[email protected]> wrote: > Free Art License > Creative Commons Creative Commons isn't a license but a collection of licenses, some of which are incompatible with Free culture and therefore of less value to the Ubuntu Community. When suggesting that somebody use a CC license, I would recommend suggesting CC-BY (the attribution license) or CC-BY-SA (the copyleft license). Luckily, CC's new license chooser applet (http://creativecommons.org/choose/) makes it clear whether you are choosing a Free culture license. > Public Domain (if you don't care about attribution) Public domain is also not a license. Whereas the Ubuntu community is diverse and global, the public domain is not consistently recognized internationally (some countries do not even have a public domain). In order to make sure that we best project Ubuntu contributors and users, I would recommend suggesting a public domain dedication with a permissive license fallback in order to cover as many jurisdictions as possible. The FSF recommends using Creative Commons' CC0 dedication (http://creativecommons.org/choose/zero/). To be clear, CC0 is a combination of a dedication to the public domain with a very permissive (and GPL-compatible) license for use in countries where the public domain dedication might be found unlawful. -- ubuntu-art mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
