Debian Developers - Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution license

This is Interesting: Free IT Magazines  
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > May 2007 > Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution license





You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

Author Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution license
Miriam Ruiz

2007-05-31, 7:25 pm

Hi,

I plan to file an ITP and package a cute small game called "Which Way Is
Up?" ( http://hectigo.net/puskutraktori/whichwayisup/ ) and maintain it.

All the game code is licensed under the GPL 2.0. All the game content,
sounds and graphics are licensed under Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution
license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ ).

As I understand, CC-by 3.0 is DFSG-free. The only potentially DFSG-freeness
problem I can see is the DRM limitation, and then again GNU FDL also has it
and is perfectly DFSG according to the last GR about it.

Anyway, I prefer to ask about it first: Does anyone know if CC-by 3.0 is
DFSG-free or not for sure, shall I go ahead and put it in the repositories?

Greetings and thanks,
Miry

Marco d'Itri

2007-05-31, 7:25 pm

On May 31, Miriam Ruiz <little.miry@gmail.com> wrote:

> Anyway, I prefer to ask about it first: Does anyone know if CC-by 3.0 is
> DFSG-free or not for sure, shall I go ahead and put it in the repositories?

The ftpmasters do.

--
ciao,
Marco

Francesco Poli

2007-05-31, 7:25 pm

On Thu, 31 May 2007 18:47:37 +0200 Miriam Ruiz wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I plan to file an ITP and package a cute small game

[...]
> All the game code is licensed under the GPL 2.0.


Good.

> All the game content,
> sounds and graphics are licensed under Creative Commons 3.0
> Attribution license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ ).


Ouch! :-(

>
> As I understand, CC-by 3.0 is DFSG-free.


My personal opinion is that *none* of CC-v3.0 licenses meets the DFSG.
They are *not* acceptable, IMO.

See
http://lists.debian.org/debian-lega...3/msg00024.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-lega...3/msg00023.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-lega...2/msg00059.html
and the threads that followed.

> The only potentially
> DFSG-freeness problem I can see is the DRM limitation, and then again
> GNU FDL also has it and is perfectly DFSG according to the last GR
> about it.


I see other DFSG-freeness issues in CC-v3.0 licenses besides the
anti-DRM clause, but anyway GR-2006-001
(http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001) did *not* decide anything
about CC licenses, nor about license clauses in general.
The decision taken by GR-2006-001 was just about the GFDL, which was
(absurdly, IMO) judged acceptable (when no part of the work is
unmodifiable/unremovable), without explaining why.

>
> Anyway, I prefer to ask about it first: Does anyone know if CC-by 3.0
> is DFSG-free or not for sure, shall I go ahead and put it in the
> repositories?


I personally think CC-v3.0 licensed works should *not* enter Debian
main.

IANADD, IANAL.

--
http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs...on_install.html
Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through?
...................................................... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Sponsored Links






Free braindumps | Software forum | Database administration forum

Copyright 2003 - 2008 webservertalk.com