Max Brown wrote:
>> Bad solution:
>> in this way the license is compatible only with itself.
> Actually, it's not. It's compatible with itself, and any license which
> grants the same rights and only a subset of the restrictions. For
> example, MIT, or zlib.
I don't understand your reasoning.
"You must cause any work that you distribute or publish,
that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
parties under the terms of this License.":
a license that contains this clause is compatible with MIT, zlib... ?
>> However, artworks are different from functional works:
>> the concept of derivative work is not the same (it is not necessary
to specify
>> "in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
>> part thereof", because a derivative artwork is a work *based* upon
another work:
>> only substantial modifications constitute derivative artworks).
> The GPL uses this language because it is intended to apply not only to
> derivative works, but also to works that aren't derivative but do
> contain the work.
Also "Against DRM":
"i. collective works formed by the assembling of works, or parts of
works, and possessing the character of a self-contained creation
resulting from selection and coordination with a specific literary,
scientific, didactic, religious, political or artistic aim, such as
encyclopedias, dictionaries, anthologies, magazines and newspapers;"
>> "Copyleft clause" is simple and clear, imho (I'm not a lawer).
> The copyleft clause does not require the distributor to grant any
> rights to anyone receiving the work; it only requires them to grant these
> rights to someone before redistributing. It's clearly intended to grant
> rights to the receiver like the GPL does, but that's not what it
> actually says.
"7. Copyleft clause
Derivative works, performances of the work, phonograms in which the
work is fixed, broadcastings of the work must be released with a
license that provides:
**a. the renunciation to exclusive exercise of rights referred to in the articles 4 and 5;**
b. the same type of clause described in article 6;
***c. the same type of clause described in this article."***
1. Licensee can distribute the original work only under "Against DRM 1.0".
If licensee makes a derivative work (or a phonogram... ), he can release it under a license compatible with "Against DRM 1.0".
Max
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best
spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com