Re: [ccsumary]Creative Commons 2.5 Licenses
\"weakish jiang\" <email@example.com> wrote: [...]
> IMO, sadly, at least the CC organization means \"all other\". In the
> Chinese translation of CC Attribute 2.5 . They use the a Chinese word
> meaning \"at the same time\", and the word \"comparable\" was omitted in
> the Chinese translation.
You may want to question that, as I don't think it would be the first
time a translation team had not chosen quite the best word.
In general, I agree with your analysis. 2.5 is improved a little.
> BTW, it seems hard to find an ideal lisence for works besides progrem.
I think it's easy: most free software licences are good for non-programs.
I acknowledge that some people want a licence which covers non-programs
in more detail. I had high hopes about cc 3.0 removing the ban on cc works
being copied onto certain media or devices that require Technological
Protection Measures (TPM, a part of DRM). If you see a cc 3.0 draft,
ask them to remove the TPM-copy-ban and require a parallel non-TPM copy
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct