www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Lawrence Rosen" <lro...@rosenlaw.com>
Subject RE: Creative Commons BY 4.0 license compatible?
Date Sat, 25 Jul 2015 17:21:42 GMT
Sam Ruby correctly wrote:
> ... absolutely nobody has suggested that distributing content while complying with the
terms of 

> the license would create a legal problem for the ASF.

 

> The relevant criteria: "The license must not place restrictions on the distribution of
larger works...".  

 

CC-BY does not, assuming the word "if" means what it does in English in that troublesome DRM
provision. No FOSS license places restrictions on larger works (except perhaps the GPL licenses
under the "static linking" doctrine). 

 

But as Luis points out, Creative Commons maybe intended in CC-BY to outlaw any use of DRM
even for mere copies of otherwise published FOSS works. This would be a serious issue for
Apache and everyone else. That would affect much more than "larger works"; it would violate
the Open Source Definition.

 

> Or as Jim puts it "one of the guiding principles is that we want it to be brain-dead
easy for people to use our code."

 

I personally object to this characterization of open source licensing as "brain-dead easy."
 :-)  Even I hate paying lawyers but I do.  

 

In any event, FOSS license compatibility is far easier for Apache's "larger works" than you
believe it is. All FOSS licenses are compatible for aggregation into larger works.

 

But we await comments by the Creative Commons attorneys to help us interpret their licenses.

 

/Larry

 

Lawrence Rosen

"If this were legal advice it would have been accompanied by a bill."

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Ruby [mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net] 
Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2015 5:34 AM
To: Legal Discuss <legal-discuss@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Creative Commons BY 4.0 license compatible?

 

On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 5:52 AM, Maximilian < <mailto:maximilian@actoflaw.co.uk>
maximilian@actoflaw.co.uk> wrote:

> 

> and that Apache

> programs would de-facto have their source code published

 

That's not the issue.

 

Please refer to the license criteria:

 <http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#criteria> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#criteria

 

In particular, I will note that absolutely nobody has suggested that distributing content
while complying with the terms of the license would create a legal problem for the ASF.

 

The relevant criteria: "The license must not place restrictions on the distribution of larger
works...".  Or as Jim puts it "one of the guiding principles is that we want it to be brain-dead
easy for people to use our code."

 

- Sam Ruby

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail:  <mailto:legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org> legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org

For additional commands, e-mail:  <mailto:legal-discuss-help@apache.org> legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message