www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Lawrence Rosen" <lro...@rosenlaw.com>
Subject FW: Wikipedia Content
Date Mon, 01 Dec 2014 18:07:52 GMT
Henri, this issue keeps coming up here! On your behalf and on behalf of other curious readers
here on this list, I will ask our Creative Commons friends your question: "Is the CC-SA license


Boldly presaging their answer, I will equivocate: "Yes and no." 


Yes, it requires reciprocation by anyone who creates an Adaptation of the CC-BY work. No,
it doesn't require anything more onerous than the Apache License for the mere incorporation
of that work into a Collection. 


Apache's rule should state that any Apache project can incorporate CC-BY components into an
Apache Collection. Apache projects can also *adapt* such works, but then our *adapted* versions
*of the CC-BY components* must be under CC-BY. 


As for the "risk" to downstream users, there is none as long as they do not themselves create
an Adaptation *of the CC-BY components* distributed in the Apache Collection but ignore the
reciprocity requirement of CC-BY. That is why we create a NOTICE file with each Apache Collection.


To be practical, I can't imagine a situation where Wikipedia content under CC-BY would matter
much anyway to any downstream user of an Apache Collection. Such components are easy for distributors
to remove or leave alone. Let's not allow confusion over license terms overrule the obvious.


As to its literary comparison to GPLv2: The Creative Commons folks have eliminated GPL-like
confusion in their licenses. Their licenses are clearer, less ambiguous, understood around
the world, and do not confuse people with terms like "static and dynamic linking" or "combining"
or "baking code into other code" that have influenced the software industry for far too long.


[FWIW, if it weren't for the rampant and self-inflicted confusion about "linking" with GPLv2
components, I would recommend that ASF also allow such GPL components in our Apache Collections.
Of course Apache projects would have to be careful when they create Adaptations of such works
and the NOTICE files would become even more relevant to some downstream users who are themselves
distributors. Fortunately, I don't have to bring the GPLv2 or GPLv3 licenses up today.]


As long as we understand what Creative Commons and Apache Software Foundation both mean by
*Adaptation* and *Collection* then we can safely use Creative Commons components.




The following definitions in CC-SA are important:

"Adaptation" means a work based upon the Work, or upon the Work and other pre-existing works,
such as a translation, adaptation, derivative work, arrangement of music or other alterations
of a literary or artistic work, or phonogram or performance and includes cinematographic adaptations
or any other form in which the Work may be recast, transformed, or adapted including in any
form recognizably derived from the original, except that a work that constitutes a Collection
will not be considered an Adaptation for the purpose of this License. For the avoidance of
doubt, where the Work is a musical work, performance or phonogram, the synchronization of
the Work in timed-relation with a moving image ("synching") will be considered an Adaptation
for the purpose of this License.

"Collection" means a collection of literary or artistic works, such as encyclopedias and anthologies,
or performances, phonograms or broadcasts, or other works or subject matter other than works
listed in Section 1(f) below, which, by reason of the selection and arrangement of their contents,
constitute intellectual creations, in which the Work is included in its entirety in unmodified
form along with one or more other contributions, each constituting separate and independent
works in themselves, which together are assembled into a collective whole. A work that constitutes
a Collection will not be considered an Adaptation (as defined below) for the purposes of this


Cc: Creative Commons



From: Henri Yandell [mailto:bayard@apache.org] 
Sent: Monday, December 1, 2014 9:00 AM
To: lrosen@rosenlaw.com <mailto:lrosen@rosenlaw.com> 
Subject: Re: Wikipedia Content


View raw message