On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:51:31 -0400 Joe Smith wrote:
[...]
The hope is that there would be few enough CC
licenses that most people would know the basic terms well enough that they
never really need to look them up, but people do need internet access to
look them up the first time, as well
Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
I'd hardly call that “the whole point” of the licenses; if anything,
it's a property of how they're used.
Fair enough
It's also a pretty poor practice: it makes access to that specific
document online a pre-condition to knowing the license terms
Ben Finney wrote
Yes. If anything, the length of verbiage that Creative Commons feels
necessary to effectively place a work in the public domain, under the
current copyright regime, only supports the idea that it's
significantly *more* complicated than working with copyright and using
an
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Joe Smith unknown_kev_...@hotmail.com wrote:
Thus the CC0 licence takes only one line to apply to a work.
#authornamemakes this work avilable under CC0
(http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)
The CC folks prefer that you use this actually:
To
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 12:39:19 +0900 Paul Wise wrote:
[...]
Since it is meant as a more universal public domain dedication, I'd
expect it would meet the DFSG.
I read it through and I failed to spot any freeness issue.
Hence, I think a work associated with the CC0 declaration/license
complies
Francesco Poli f...@firenze.linux.it writes:
A little comment: these public domain declarations are getting
longer and longer, more and more complicated, less and less
practical to adopt.
I think that just adopting the Expat/MIT license
(http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt) is a much
Hello d-legal,
with the recent release of CC0 by Creative Commons, I wonder what your
opinions on it are about using this for software that might be included in
Debian?
Regards,
Max
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Maximilian Gaß wrote:
with the recent release of CC0 by Creative Commons, I wonder what your
opinions on it are about using this for software that might be included in
Debian?
Since it is meant as a more universal public domain dedication, I'd
expect it would
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote:
Here is a copy/paste of the the legal code for CC0 1.0 Universal for
-legal regulars to dissect:
I should also point out the human-readable summary:
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
CC0 1.0 Universal
No
9 matches
Mail list logo
