Thanks Wirawan Purwanto for the questions and Owen Stephens for the detailed response! I don't have anything to add, except to state that everything Owen has said already is correct according to my understanding of our licensing. I completely sympathise with how frustrating it can be to find amazing materials that you're not able to use because of licensing issues. Let's make more CC-BY (or CC-0!) content!
Best, Erin On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 8:23 AM Owen Stephens <o...@ostephens.com> wrote: > My views inline: > > On 8 Aug 2019, at 15:47, Purwanto, Wirawan <wpurw...@odu.edu> wrote: > Can we actually take a piece of CC-BY-SA materials and include it in a > greater work that is licensed by CC-BY? > > I think https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/ShareAlike_compatibility is > pretty clear on this: > > "CC BY is one-way compatible with BY-SA. You may adapt a BY work and > apply BY-SA to your contributions, but you may not adapt a BY-SA work and > apply BY to your contributions.” > > Assuming that perhaps the piece coming from CC-BY-SA will still be under > CC-BY-SA, and not the CC-BY governing the rest of the work. Is this > possible? > > Yes. This page gives some guidance on this > https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Marking/Creators/Marking_third_party_content > Essentially it is possible to state at a granular level that particular > parts of content are licensed separately. > > However in terms of the Carpentry lessons and how they are published I’m > not sure how easy it would be to manage this. The lessons are currently > structured with a license stated at the level of the whole lesson (by a > LICENSE.md file in the lesson repository). Possibly this could be worked > around by some changes to the LICENSES.md file to indicate there are > materials which are licensed separately. It might take some careful wording > to accurately describe what is covered by the CC-BY license and what is not. > > In addition the Software Carpentry website states: > "All of our lessons are freely available under the Creative Commons - > Attribution License.” (https://software-carpentry.org/lessons/) > and > "All Software Carpentry instructional material is made available under > the Creative Commons Attribution license." ( > https://software-carpentry.org/license/) > > Including non CC-BY content (even clearly labelled) would go against these > statements in my opinion. > > It’s also worth considering the downsides of including content with more > restrictive licensing - it would make it more difficult for others to > re-use the Carpentries content because they would need to ensure they > checked and tracked materials licensed under anything other than CC-BY. It > could add an overhead to lesson maintainance. > > > Related to the question above: Has anyone ever worked with other people in > adopting their materials and relicensing under CC-BY? What experience that > you can share? Are people generally willing to accept such a request? > > I can only speak as someone who has produced and licensed materials under > CC-BY - and my approach is always that I love to see use of the materials I > produce, especially if they are appropriately attributed! I’ve currently > having a discussion about using some material I’ve previously published as > CC-BY in a Library Carpentry lesson - so I can say that at least some > producers are very keen on seeing their work re-used widely. > > I think it is always worth approaching people and asking - the worst > outcome is that they say they aren’t willing to amend their license. > > > Why I am asking these questions here? Things such as figures, tables, and > code snippets can sometimes hard to come by and if we can leverage what > others have made, all the better, rather than us also spending a lot of > time remaking them just because of incompatible license. > > > I understand this - but I see making such materials available under a > CC-BY license as a positive outcome of work on Carpentries material and > well worth the investment of time. If we can take concepts and illustrate > them in a way that can be more widely re-used that seems like a very good > thing. > > I definitely understand the frustration of finding materials that would be > useful but don’t have compatible licenses - this happens a lot! But > ultimately for me this is about how Carpentries makes materials available > in a way that increases accessibility and use by adopting an Open approach, > and I wouldn’t want to see that change. > > Owen > > *The Carpentries <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/latest>* / discuss / > see discussions <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss> + > participants <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/members> + > delivery > options <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/subscription> > Permalink > <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/Td64229aeb252a027-M98678e32a6af3b2c14abfd13> > -- *Erin Becker* *Associate Director* with The Carpentries <https://carpentries.org/> Pronouns: she/her/hers Schedule a meeting with me: *https://calendly.com/ebecker-1 <https://calendly.com/ebecker-1>* ------------------------------------------ The Carpentries: discuss Permalink: https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/Td64229aeb252a027-M2f98ba07f6b687de23362796 Delivery options: https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/subscription
