Anthony writes:
"the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License"
There are over 100 Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike Licenses.
[citation needed]
--Mike
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Mike Godwin mgodwin@wikimedia.org wrote:
Anthony writes:
"the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License"
There are over 100 Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike Licenses.
[citation needed]
There are 74 due to versioning and jurisdiction ports, see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/index.rdf
Apologies for lack of an HTML version of that list.
In any case, http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Licensing_update and all previous discussion I've seen makes it clear the specific license considered is http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
Everywhere CC BY and BY-SA licenses are currently used (Wikinews and Commons) care has been taken to cite the specific version used. I would be incredibly surprised if the same care was not exercised if BY-SA is adopted as the main content license.
Mike
On Wednesday 21 January 2009 17:50:38 Mike Godwin wrote:
Anthony writes:
"the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License"
There are over 100 Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike Licenses.
[citation needed]
Given various versions and localisations, this may well be true :)
Of course, no one is suggesting that it should be any other version than CC-BY-SA-3.0. But perhaps it should be considered if it should be CC-BY-SA-3.0-unported or CC-BY-SA-3.0-US? Or perhaps where possible each project should use its own localised version of CC-BY-SA?
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org