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

Re: Alternatives to Creative Commons

On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Karl Goetz <karl@kgoetz.id.au> wrote:

I'm pretty sure at Linux.conf.au this year in the games miniconf,
someone from CC Australia was recomending the use of CC (-SA i think)
for game data, and said it didnt conflict with the GPL.
I too have heard people from CC claim that CC licensed work was GPL-compatible.  This disagrees with the FSF's position: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/

IANAL, but I believe in the FSF's legal accuracy in this given that I've heard (possibly innocent) lies about the GPL spoken by CC people, such as the perpetuation of the "linking clause" myth and in great detail how the GPL doesn't cover non-instruction software such as icons and fonts.

Again, it's always possible to dual license the content.  The (A)GPLv3 is stronger copyleft than the CC-BY-3.0 and CC-BY-SA-3.0 licenses, and more specifically addresses software matters (refering to any information stored on a computer, not just instruction code), so if a work is already being made available either under the CC-BY-3.0 or CC-BY-SA-3.0 there are no additional permissions granted by also offering it under the (A)GPLv3 while clearing up any questions about the legal distributability of their software.

Reply to: