anelok: new and enhanced Y-Box (draft)
edorfaus at xepher.net
Sat Jan 18 10:16:17 EST 2014
On 01/18/2014 03:36 PM, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> Many people who license things as CC-SA or GPL really don't care that
> much, and just want the spirit of copyleft. They're not going to start
> lawsuits anyway, and certainly not as long as the result is still copyleft.
I'm in that camp myself, except I care more about the freedom than the
copyleft. Of course, copyleft is the means by which that freedom is
ensured, so... yeah.
>>>> P.S. Things would be *so* much simpler if only everyone could use
>>>> CC0 instead of all these other licenses... Fat chance of that
>>>> happening though.
> CC0 doesn't do copyleft. It's a statement of "I think this is
> worthless, but if you can use it, more power to you". (Obviously that's
> my interpretation.) A copyleft license, on the other hand, says "I made
> something valuable, and I donate it to the community without allowing
> people to use it against that community".
I don't really ascribe that value judgment to it, but I can see how that
implication came about.
Also, after thinking about it, I think I meant public domain more than
CC0 - CC0 just being a way to get it into the public domain in the first
There's lots of stuff in the public domain that isn't worthless, though
I'll admit that, mostly, it's only there because it's old.
>Well, unless there wouldn't be any "bad
> guys", but that is so unrealistic that I don't even consider it. :-P
Yeah, that's basically the point I was alluding to. If only there
weren't any bad guys, we wouldn't need copyright at all - which indeed
is nothing more than an unrealistic fantasy. (For one thing, define
"bad" in a specific way that works for everyone. Not gonna happen.)
... He said, while using a communication medium that was designed for a
world without any bad guys. :P
(Of course, that's one of the main reasons it has the problems it does
today, too, so that's not exactly a ringing endorsement...)
More information about the discussion