[Foundation-l] What's appropriate attribution?

[Jussi-Ville Heiskanen]

Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
>
> The other *must solve* issue is the gratuitous incompatibility with
> similar but different licenses: You can't create a new work that is
> derived from both third-party FDL content and third-party CC-By-SA
> content while strictly conforming with the licenses.  (many people
> would call this the most significant problem with the FDL today,
> thought it's also true of all other existing copyleft free content
> licenses)
>
> I think that almost everyone agrees that you ought to be able to do
> this (the most negative thing I've seen said about it is that you
> ought to respect the most restrictive of the combined terms in this
> case), and there are a number of ways to address this.  My preferred
> way is to just have the licenses explicitly enumerate compatible
> licenses and the rules for combined works. GPLv3 addressed the
> compatibility question in a different way, but it was addressed
> successfully there, so again it has been proven that it can be done.
>
>   

As I understand it (correct me if I am wrong), one of the
salient problems with "close but no cigar" license compatibility
is that a license either *is* "viral", or it *is not*. And getting
by that is near impossible in a way that is coherent.


Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen