[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Creative Commons Attribution license element

On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 12:06:25PM -0400, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> I'm writing because I've just been made aware of this summary of the
> Creative Commons Attribution 1.0 license:
>     http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/04/msg00031.html
> Let me first note that Creative Commons uses a suite of licenses, with
> a number of mix-and-match license elements (Attribution, ShareAlike,
> NonCommercial, NoDerivatives). So any CC license that would require
> Attribution would also fall under this analysis.

Right, the CC licenses are generally known to be a collection of
non-free licenses.

> Conditions on modification are, of course, a matter of degree.

No, actually, they are matters of form. Not degree. Unacceptable forms
will always be unacceptable regardless of how large or small the
relevant restriction is.

> Let me note here that, although the Open Source Definition is not
> identical to the DFSG, the OSI has approved a few licenses that have
> equivalent or greater attribution requirements.

Yes, OSI does approve of some licenses which we do not. This is not
new. They require less freedom than Debian.

> So, that's my feedback. I'd like to know what can be done to amend the
> analysis and re-open this license (as well as Attribution 2.0,
> ShareAlike 1.0, and Attribution-ShareAlike 1.0 and 2.0) for
> consideration.

We've done these to death already, starting in 2003. They're
non-free. That won't change. Future versions of the licenses will be
considered the same as any license.

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: