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

Re: Free art license, CC and DFSG

On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 13:56:47 +0100 Julien Cristau wrote:

> On Fri, Mar  9, 2007 at 13:41:35 +0100, Ismael Valladolid Torres
> wrote:
> > Julien Cristau escribe:
> > > CC-* before 3.0 are non-free
> > 
> > Why exactly!?
> See http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary (this is about 2.0, but I
> think the same problems apply to 2.5).

Wait, wait!  This thread has gone forward *way too fast*!  ;-)

Just to recap.

As I previously stated (in this same thread), my personal opinion on
CC-v3.0 licenses is that they fail to meet the DFSG.  Other people
disagree with me, though.

As far as previous versions of CC licenses are concerned, there's
consensus that they *all* fail to meet the DFSG: see

 * the summary of the CC-by-v1.0 by Jeremy Hankins[1]
 * the already cited summary of Creative Commons v2.0 Licenses by Evan

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/04/msg00031.html
[2] http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html

CC-v2.5 licenses share some of the issues that are present in CC-v2.0
ones, and hence fail to meet the DFSG.

As a consequence CC-by is not OK in my opinion.

Now, after clarifying my take on this matter, let's get back to
Mathieu's initial question.
Unfortunately, finding DFSG-free songs is really difficult at present.
My suggestion is trying hard and finding songs under well known
DFSG-free licenses (GNU GPL v2, Expat/MIT, BSD, X11) or dedicated to the
public domain.
Another *great* thing to do could be persuading some copyright holder(s)
to relicense (or even dual-license) their songs in a DFSG-free manner.

 Need to refresh your keyring in a piecewise fashion?
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpVIE_iXOQwJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: