www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Fontana <rfont...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: New versions of CC licenses
Date Sat, 07 Dec 2013 17:25:42 GMT
On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 05:24:23AM -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:
> To facilitate the creation of such derivative works, the ASF makes an attempt
> to avoid including works that are provided under licenses that are more
> restrictive than the ASF's own license.
> CC-By appears to be such a license.  Whether or not you agree with Jeff, it is
> the case that both the Mozilla foundation and the FSF have deemed that CC-BY is
> incompatible with their licenses.  

This would then imply that the 4-clause BSD (with the advertising
clause) should not be in Category A, since it is widely held (by most
of those who claim to care about the issue) that the advertising
clause is incompatible with the GPL. I have even heard of downstream
commercial entities that have voiced concerns over the use of
advertising clauses. But both Roy Fielding and JimJag have said that
all versions of the BSD license, including those with the advertising
clause, are supposed to be in Category A. I have no view on whether
that is correct or not, just pointing out what seems like an
inconsistency to me.

A point that I think Larry may have been making (unless I
misunderstood it) was that it makes sense to look at things by
specific situation. Especially so for something like CC BY, since it
will most often appear to cover discrete, easily removable or
separable or substitutable things (as in Jeff's hypothetical about CC
BY icons). 

For all I know the FSF would say that a CC BY icon in an otherwise
GPL-licensed work is an example of 'mere aggregation', meaning that
the incompatibility of CC BY with the GPL (if in fact the FSF holds
that view) does not arise in that common context. In the case of MPL
2.0, it's difficult for me to see how a CC BY icon could be
incompatible with MPL 2.0 software, since that would seem to be an
example of a permitted 'Larger Work'.

- RF

To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message