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

Re: Free art license, CC and DFSG



On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:41:12 +0100 Ismael Valladolid Torres wrote:

> Francesco Poli escribe:
> > 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.
> 
> Maybe a big part of the problem is that licenses which are ok for
> documentation or software works are not ok for artistic works and vice
> versa.

The problem is that the licenses that are palatable to many artists fail
to meet the DFSG.  But, there's nothing new with that: the licenses that
are palatable to many programmers and software house CEOs also fail to
meet the DFSG (who said Microsoft EULA?).

> 
> I'd find surprising that only artistic works released in the public
> domain were DFSG compliant enough to be released with Debian.

That's not the case: as has already been stated, works released under
the terms of good licenses do comply with the DFSG (for instance: GNU
GPL v2, Expat/MIT, X11/MIT, 2-clause BSD, 3-clause BSD, ...).


P.S.: Please do not reply to me, Cc:ing the list, as I didn't asked you
to do so.  I am a debian-legal subscriber and would rather avoid
receiving the same message twice.  Reply to the list only (as long as
you want to send a public response).  See
http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct


-- 
 http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/refresh-pubring.html
 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: pgpc_nGy8PkNh.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: