>> B. == License rules for source and binary packages == [...] > I'm not agree with this point. We have good and practicals reasons to > allow only free software on our repositories, however, any asset under a > CC No Derivate and/or CC No commercial license clauses doesn't qualifies > as a "free cultural work", assets aren't software, therefore they aren't > under the same requirements as software does.
I don't see any disagreement here, or do you agree with a wider exception for ND nonfunctional data than in A? I have referred to the "free software or free culture" complexity since both definitions are useful for different kinds of works and they aren't equivalent. > My concern about assets under a CC No commercial license clause combined > with free software is different because I'm unsure if such material will > make illegal to sell the asset(s) within the free software binaries as a > whole. No one on CC answered such concern yet... It's not completely clear, selling collections is probably forbidden by Section 4(b) of CC-BY-NC 3.0 Unported.
pgpNAXEY2kdYA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.parabolagnulinux.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
