At 10:21 PM 5/10/99 -0700, Kevin Shrieve wrote:
>Would it be off-topic to ask what thoughts people have on licensing
the art
>they make?
On the application of copyleft to all works that may be copyrighted, I
have reduced my thinking to the essentials.
There are two copyleft distinctions that are important to me. I
want a copyleft license (or a family of licenses) that lets me specify
two characteristics: attribution and affiliation.
Attribution is the requirement that a derived or composite work, based on
my work, must preserve a proper attribution trail back to me, as the
original creator of the work.
Affiliation is the requirement that my work can only affiliate with works
that are copylefted. Further, it is the requirement that composite
and derived works must preserve copyleft. I tend to think of this
as the distinction between the GPL and LGPL. The GPL assures
"domain closure", in that GPL'd works may only affiliate with
copylefted works. The LGPL is a "patch" license that
permits a work to affiliate with non-copylefted works.
Were I to permute the copyleft licenses according to these two copyleft
distinctions I would get four licenses. Assuming that the GPL and
the LGPL both embody the requirement for attribution, the four licenses
would be
GPL = copyleft + attribution + domain closure
LGPL = copyleft + attribution - domain closure
WGPL = copyleft - attribution + domain closure
WLGPL = copyleft - attribution - domain closure
MY PREFERENCE AMONG THESE LICENSES
Among these licenses I would prefer the WGPL because I value most highly
the proliferation of copyleft and, in order to further that
proliferation, seek to grant an additional freedom, namely, the freedom
to preserve copyleft free of the encumbrance of having to preserve the
attribution trail.
--
Copyright(c) 1999 Lyno Sullivan; this work is free and may
be copied, modified and distributed under the GNU Library
General Public License (LGPL) and it comes with absolutely
NO WARRANTY
<http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lgpl.html>;
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: licensing Tesla Coil
- Re: licensing James H.G. Redekop
- Re: licensing Kevin Shrieve
- Re: licensing Jeff Knowlton
- Re: licensing Paul Winkler
- Re: licensing Paul Winkler
- Re: licensing Jo Totland
- Re: licensing Tesla Coil
- Re: licensing alex
- Re: licensing Paul Winkler
- Re: licensing Lyno Sullivan
- Re: licensing Kevin Shrieve
- Re: licensing Michael Stutz
- Re: licensing Tesla Coil
- Re: licensing Tesla Coil
- Re: licensing Michael Stutz
- Re: licensing 17.hzV.tRL.478
- Re: licensing Tesla Coil
- Re: licensing Lyno Sullivan
