On 2004-07-12 13:42:36 +0100 Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...because CC*SA is not DFSG-free at the moment,
Why do you think so? ShareAlike 2.0 hasn't been reviewed so far.
ShareAlike 2.0 hasn't been reviewed because it doesn't exist! Maybe
you mean BY-SA? That shares the troublesome clause 4a of BY.
Meanwhile, anything under NC and ND terms should trivially fail to
follow DFSG. That completes the set of CC 2.0 licences, as far as I
can tell from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know
http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing
"Matthew Garrett is quite the good sort of fellow, despite what
my liver is sure to say about him in [...] 40 years" -- branden
