[Foundation-l] Creative Commons CC-BY-SA Draft Statement of Intent

[geni]

On 05/04/2008, Milos Rancic <millosh at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 12:38 PM, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >  >  - I would really like to see that CC is working on our license with
>  >  >  FSF and/or Software Freedom Law Center. At least to consult them about
>  >  >  the conditions. Actually, I am interested to hear what do those two
>  >  >  organizations have to say about the new conditions.
>  >
>  >  The FSF produced the GFDL. I think that disqualifies then from telling
>  >  anyone else how to write a free content license.
>
>
> As well as CC made a lot of shit on Internet (SA i not really SA, NC
>  is not really NC, ND is not really ND; actually, according to the
>  various interpretations, the only clear condition is BY), which
>  disqualifies them to write a free content license.
>
>  There are always two options: to talk or not to talk.
>

CC have been far more willing to engage and fix their mistakes. While
the, doesn't do what is says on the tin, issues are annoying the
licenses are at least usable in the majority of cases.


> I want to hear an analysis of our lawyer (CC lawyers are not *our*;
>  AFAIK, Erik is not a lawyer) about possible consequences of the new
>  features of the license. As well as I want to hear by our lawyer an
>  analysis of contemporary features of the license to which we intend to
>  switch.

Would be useful yes.

>  And if you don't like FSF so much, I would be quite happy with MIT
>  interpretation, as an independent one.

MIT have experience with software licenses but I don't know much about
their recent activity. Any commentary from them would be of interest
but ah would they be interested in commenting.

Historical we've tended to pay attention to the Debian mob.

-- 
geni