On 2/23/07, Stephen Bain <stephen.bain(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Or give them the extremely quick summary: the viral
nature of copyleft
licences (the "share-alike" provisions) prevents commercial
exploitation while allowing commercial innovation.
That is, unfortunately, not quite true. For images in particular,
CC-BY-SA provides no meaningful protection from commercial
exploitation. An article using a CC-BY-SA picture is _not_ considered
a derivative; only any direct modifications to the picture trigger the
share-alike clause.
We are currently discussing alternatives on the cc-licenses list that
would trigger share-alike on strongly semantically linked combinations
as well -- but the current license does not do that.
Strangely enough, the existing CC-BY-SA license _does_ consider the
combination of music and a film a derivative work that would require
the whole film to be copyleft -- but not the embedding of images into
an article.
--
Peace & Love,
Erik
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
"An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic