[Foundation-l] What's wrong with CC-BY-SA?
Anthere9 at yahoo.com
Sun Dec 2 08:59:08 UTC 2007
Robert Rohde wrote:
> On Dec 1, 2007 3:32 PM, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> On 12/2/07, 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.
>> Worst possible reason to like a license, ever. :-)
>> Let's make a strong copyleft license that appeals to photographers.
> In my opinion, that is only possible if the copyleft provisions
> unambiguously transfer to text written to accompany the image. Anything
> less, is little better than CC-BY. Most people that use photographs do so
> for the purposes of illustration rather than for the purposes of making
> derivative images. Hence copyleft provisions that apply only derivative
> images, and not to the text being illustrated, are intrinsically weak and of
> little impact.
> -Robert A. Rohde
Is not the liberal use of Wikicommons to host images (which can be
embedded in dozen of text pages afterwards) a bit inconsistant with this
concern anyway ?
More information about the foundation-l