Quoting Evan Prodromou ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > I note that there's no current list of licenses made primarily for > non-software works that follow the principles and spirit of Open > Source software -- so-called "Open Content".
You probably meant "...at the OSI Web site", but the above is part of what my site's PerlHoo1[1] knowledgebase page on http://linuxmafia.com/kb/Licensing_and_Law aims to cover. (Suggested additions welcomed.) > I believe there are a number of Open Content licenses that would > satisfy the Open Source Definition. Of particular interest to me are > the Creative Commons licenses -- a suite of 11+ licenses with > mix-and-match license elements for various uses. I've found this the most-useful entry point to the CC licence smorgasbord, and link to it from my knowledgebase: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ > I think that the following Creative Commons licenses could satisfy the > Open Source Definition: > > Attribution (BSD-like) > Attribution-ShareAlike (GPL-like) > ShareAlike (GPL-like) Concur. (You'll notice that I allow access to material subject to my knowledgebase's compilation copyright using CC's Attribution-ShareAlike 1.0 licence.) [1] Neat CGI thing. |'ve improved it a bit, and released changes at http://linuxmafia.com/pub/linux/apps/ -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
