[FM Discuss] Licensing - GPL II vs. Creative Commons
Chepi Gimenez
chepi.gimenez at gmail.com
Wed Aug 4 11:15:18 PDT 2010
Eventhough you *can* use the GPL for any kind of work, CC licenses are more
carefully engineered towards protecting content =! software.
This is especially useful in the non-commercial branch of licences. While
both content and code can be distribued in similar ways, software
applications can generally do only the thing they were engineered to do, and
*with the aid of a computer. C*ontent can be used in much more disparate
ways. The GPL is very meticulous and effective covering *distribution*,
being essentially a software license, but CC licenses offer better coverage
for *distribution&after-use*
In some cases, having a certain degree of control on what happens after
someone has acquired the content, such as wether it is used for rightful
profit or not is -IMHO- an author's right.
chepi
Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 1:32 AM, John Curwood
<marketing at lovinglearning.co.nz>wrote:
> Hi Lachlan,
>
> This is a list of the currently available licenses in booki when
> publishing a book.
>
> > GPL
> > GPLv2+
> > LGPL
> > LGPLv2.1
> > GPLv3+
> > GPLv2
> > GPLv3
> > CC-BY
> > CC-BY-SA
> > Artistic
> > BSD
> > Public Domain
> > LGPLv3
> > MIT
>
> If you look at the following link on the Gnu website
> (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLOtherThanSoftware) they
> state that you can use the GPL for any kind of work as long as you make
> it very clear what your "source code" is for the work.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
>
> On Mon, 2010-08-02 at 13:23 +1000, Lachlan Musicman wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 12:46, John Curwood
> > <marketing at lovinglearning.co.nz> wrote:
> > Hi Rebecca,
> >
> > When publishing a book, you once again make a license choice,
> > this time
> > there are a lot to choose from including "all" the different
> > flavours of
> > the GPL.
> >
> >
> > Can I get clarification on this?
> >
> >
> > I would think that the booki _code_ would be GPL, but I'm not sure
> > that the GPL is appropriate for documents - either the Gnu Free
> > Document License (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html ) or the CC
> > licences are more appropriate, aren't they?
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
> > http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
> http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.flossmanuals.net/pipermail/discuss-flossmanuals.net/attachments/20100804/9ffd2008/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Discuss
mailing list