[Foundation-l] What's wrong with CC-BY-SA?
wikimail at inbox.org
Sun Dec 2 00:59:34 UTC 2007
On Dec 1, 2007 7:22 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 1, 2007 6:27 PM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Greg will of course correct me if I'm wrong - but I suspect the
> > problem is that lots of people want CC-by-sa because it's easier to
> > reuse stuff ... but that GFDL makes it hard to reuse stuff is
> > considered a *feature* by many, e.g. photographers who license work as
> > GFDL but also sell it privately. That is: the thing that makes GFDL a
> > pain in the backside for a wiki is precisely why they like it, and
> > they want it to stay a pain in the backside for that reason.
> I don't know of anyone who doesn't want their photographs being used
> in freely licensed work. The contention on this point is that the
> creative commons cc-by-sa, per the position pushed by the creative
> commons allows people to make non-free works out of cc-by-sa images.
> There are people, myself included, that think this defeats the purpose
> of free licensing in this context.
So would you be willing to license your images under the GFDL, and
interpret that to mean that Wikipedia can still use them in its
encyclopedia which is released under CC-BY-SA? If so, that seems like
a reasonable compromise. Relicense the text under CC-BY-SA, but allow
the authors to choose any free license for the images.
And then, when a stronger copyleft version of CC-BY-SA comes out (say
CC-BY-STRONG), you could license your images under that as well as the
GFDL. Personally I'd argue for "Preparation of derivative works is
permitted provided that you cause any such work to be licensed as a
whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this
License." Then it'd cover any derivative which can possibly be
covered by copyright law. But it might be too US-centric.
My own license which I wrote goes as follows: "Copying, distribution,
public performance, public display, digital audio transmission, and
use of this work is permitted without restriction. Circumvention of
any technological measure or measures which effectively control access
to this work is permitted without restriction. Preparation of
derivative works is permitted provided that you cause any such work to
be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the
terms of this License." Very US-centric, though, and doesn't require
attribution, which probably makes it unacceptable to most people.
More information about the foundation-l