Re: Could you please forward this proposed license to Teosto? (was: Re: Choosing a license for Frets on Fire songs)
2007/4/27, Matthew Johnson <debian@matthew.ath.cx> wrote:
On Thu Apr 26 21:16, Jason Spiro wrote:
> I don't know much about how to write licenses, and this is the first
> one I have ever written. I figured that everything after the "subject
> to the following conditions:" would automatically override the initial
> permissions I gave. I guess I was wrong?
This is a very very good reason not to write your own. debian-legal
always advises against doing so. How about using:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd-nc/1.0/legalcode with 4. d.
added saying:
You may not distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or
publicly digitally perform the Work except as part of the game.
and 1. g.:
"The Game" means the game Frets on Fire or a derivative work of
Frets on Fire.
Sounds like a better idea than using the license I wrote :)
Though if we want to distribute the game in main and the music in
non-free shouldn't we write the 4. d. clause more liberally? How
about "You may not distribute the Work except in a form meant to be
used with The Game." (That'd mean "except e.g. with frets data
included alongside the music"; can anyone suggest a better phrasing?)
Or, how about this phrasing instead? "You may only distribute the
Work if You intend that the work be used with game software." This
allows for the possibility of the Work to be used in other computer
games.
What do you all think?
This would, of course, have to be renamed something else...
How does "Frets On Fire
Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial-ForFretsOnly 1.0" license sound?
Cheers,
Jason
--
Jason Spiro: computer consulting with a smile.
I provide software development and training services to clients worldwide.
Contact me for a FREE consultation. Satisfaction guaranteed.
+1 (416) 781-5938 / Email: info@jspiro.com / MSN: jasonspiro@hotmail.com
Reply to: