On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Jamie Bullock wrote:
On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 01:22 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
<snip> > Actually any of the CC licenses are bad for software, and really in > general, IMHO. They are not compatible with the Debian Free Software > Guidelines, and every single one has an really vague attribution > clause that should be avoided.
OK, what software license would you recommend for someone who wants to place the 'share alike' restriction on their Pd patch? The GPL is really geared towards compiled languages, and a lot of the wording is irrelevant in the context of a Pd patch IMO.
I think the GPL is perfectly relevant here. If you want people to distribute their changes, then the GPL will be totally effective for Pd patches.
If you want to know more, check out my essay Copyright Is For Copying in the new book:
Great! I just added it to my Amazon wishlist.
If you are impatient, you can start with this blog entry, which then got turned into that article, along with a bunch of research:
http://at.or.at/hans/blog/2007/01/14/problems-with-cc-attribution-clauses/
I should mention, mako hill writes quite a bit about this stuff too:
http://mako.cc/copyrighteous/20080221-00
.hc
Jamie
-- www.postlude.co.uk http://www.linkedin.com/in/jamiebullock
-- www.postlude.co.uk http://www.linkedin.com/in/jamiebullock
Birmingham City University is the new name unveiled for the former University of Central England in Birmingham For more information about the name change go to http://www.bcu.ac.uk/namechange/official_announcement.html
zen
\
\
\[D[D[D[D