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

Re: Status update from Create Commons workgroup?

On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 04:08:01PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > What is the current status of the work going on to try to make some of
> > the Creative Commons licenses acceptable according to the Debian free
> > software guidelines?  I know there were a workgroup being formed in
> > March, and I hope they are doing good work.
> > 
> > I spoke with Lawrence Lessig yesterday, asking him for updates and if
> > he believed it would be possible to get the licenses acceptable by
> > Debian.  He said he had not heard news on the topic for half a year,
> > and that he was waiting for feedback from Debian.  He said that the
> > suggested changes had been accepted except two suggestions, which he
> > claimed did not have the effect intended.
> > 
> > So, what is the experience on Debians part?  Are we getting closer to
> > a solution?

I thought that had been sent back to them some time ago... we've seen
a draft that's probably okay except for a few details that are kinda
uncertain and some wording that's just plain weird. I don't see any
reason why it won't get fixed and turn into the basis for the next
versions of the CC licenses, but AFAIK we're waiting on CC right now.

That's Evan's problem though, go ask him. I just read licenses.

> If we knew which of the two suggestions "did not have the effect
> intended" (and why), we could come up with plenty of alternate suggestions.

Bad explanation on our side, or misunderstanding on theirs. I believe
these have all been cleared up now.

> In addition, a few of our suggestions were of the "this is way too confusing
> to read" variety rather than the "this is non-free" variety, and if they
> didn't take those, that's just fine.

Actually they took most (all?) of those.

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: