[Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

[Mike Godwin]

Mike Linksvayer wrote:

>>> 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

That sounds more likely than "over 100," although the relevance of the  
total number is difficult to see, given that the only class of CC-BY- 
SA licenses we'd be working with is CC-BY-SA 3.x.

> 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/

Yes.

> 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.

Of course.

See also rms's excellent discussion of the issue at http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/2008-12-fdl-open-letter/ 
  .

It's hard to make the argument that CC-BY-SA 3.0 is somehow weaker  
than GFDL when Stallman himself thinks it isn't.


--Mike