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

Re: Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution license



On Thu, 31 May 2007 18:47:37 +0200 Miriam Ruiz wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I plan to file an ITP and package a cute small game
[...]
> All the game code is licensed under the GPL 2.0.

Good.

> All the game content,
> sounds and graphics are licensed under Creative Commons 3.0
> Attribution license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ ).

Ouch!  :-(

> 
> As I understand, CC-by 3.0 is DFSG-free.

My personal opinion is that *none* of CC-v3.0 licenses meets the DFSG.
They are *not* acceptable, IMO.

See
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/03/msg00024.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/03/msg00023.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/02/msg00059.html
and the threads that followed.

> The only potentially
> DFSG-freeness problem I can see is the DRM limitation, and then again
> GNU FDL also has it and is perfectly DFSG according to the last GR
> about it.

I see other DFSG-freeness issues in CC-v3.0 licenses besides the
anti-DRM clause, but anyway GR-2006-001
(http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001) did *not* decide anything
about CC licenses, nor about license clauses in general.
The decision taken by GR-2006-001 was just about the GFDL, which was
(absurdly, IMO) judged acceptable (when no part of the work is
unmodifiable/unremovable), without explaining why.

> 
> Anyway, I prefer to ask about it first: Does anyone know if CC-by 3.0
> is DFSG-free or not for sure, shall I go ahead and put it in the
> repositories?

I personally think CC-v3.0 licensed works should *not* enter Debian
main.

IANADD, IANAL.

-- 
 http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html
 Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through?
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgp6bxYxSwPTz.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: