Sounds good.

I'd like to mail pmcs@ as a part of doing this. Let them know the state of CC license usage rather than just updating here.

Does that sound okay?

Hen


On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:
I'd say let's see how it goes... as you say, CC isn't really a s/w
license and anything we can do to further differentiate that from
our concern about s/w licenses related to our projects would be good.

> On Jan 12, 2017, at 12:33 AM, Henri Yandell <bayard@apache.org> wrote:
>
> We had a lengthy thread last year regarding Creative Commons Attribution licenses. The upshot was that we moved it from Category A to Category B.
>
> I'm not looking to open the discussion of moving it away from Category A, but I'd like to reopen the decision of where to move it to. Category B is designed for 'weakly' copyleft licenses and CC-BY is both not weak copyleft, nor were our concerns related to copyleft.
>
> Rather than moving it to Category B, I'd like to move it to the section entitled 'Can Apache projects include Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike works?'.
>
> The upshot is that this will move software under the CC-BY licenses to a 'talk to legal-discuss@' from its current 'use in binary form'. Media (which we should define better; 'for example audio, video and images') would remain allowed for both CC-BY and CC-BY-SA.
>
> That maps well to CC's recommendation not to use CC licenses for software: https://creativecommons.org/faq/#can-i-apply-a-creative-commons-license-to-software
>
> Any thoughts or obvious problems this would cause?
>
> Hen


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