[Foundation-l] Licensing update roll-out
thomas.dalton at gmail.com
Thu Jun 18 17:29:38 UTC 2009
2009/6/18 Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org>:
> 2009/6/18 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>:
>> That seems reasonable to me, but I would say "alternative terms"
>> rather than "additional terms". Additional terms suggests you have to
>> follow them in addition to the CC ones, which isn't the case.
> The logic behind "additional" is that the phrase says "text is under
> ..", but the re-user may also want to copy any embedded media in the
> page. So it's an attempt to address both the issue of separate media
> licensing and alternative licensing options in a single phrase. :-)
Ok. Perhaps it is best not to use a single phrase, then. How about
"Text is available under CC-BY-SA, additional terms may apply to
non-text elements. Some elements may also be available under
alternative terms." (or words to that effect). Still pretty concise,
but isn't misleading.
More information about the foundation-l