anelok: new and enhanced Y-Box (draft)

Paul Boddie paul at boddie.org.uk
Sat Jan 18 10:31:21 EST 2014


On Saturday 18. January 2014 15.36.35 Bas Wijnen wrote:
> 
> 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".

It's always worth looking at this matter from the other side in case people 
start to question the generosity of those making their work available under 
copyleft terms: copyleft is perhaps the only mechanism that seeks to guarantee 
that someone will be able to receive a work and be able to modify it, 
understand it, make their own variant of it, and so on.

CC0 can also result in such privileges being passed on, but it requires that 
everybody involved does the right thing, and experience suggests that this 
doesn't always happen. The whole tivoisation thing indicated that people were 
even willing to test the legal boundaries to avoid doing the right thing (if 
not actually the mandated thing) even with copyleft licensing applying to the 
works involved.

So it is safe to say that guarantees are needed to uphold the sort of culture 
that I think those of us in this community (and many others) favour.

Paul

P.S. As for concrete licence suggestions, it is difficult. I had high hopes 
for the GNU SFDL, but it never got high enough in the agenda to get done.



More information about the discussion mailing list


interactive