[tei-council] Fwd: TEI licensing issues

[Piotr Bański]

On 13/09/11 14:26, Laurent Romary wrote:
> OK. What I meant is that, if I have understood the situation correctly, it was not necessarily planned to have this GPL constraints on some of our TEI productions. 

The description of what you call GPL constraints as "viral" comes, as
far as I barely recall, from some Microsoft spokesman. He was very
successful -- this is a strong meme, people catch it unawares. It's very
cunning: it reverses the imagery, from a means to keep stuff free to a
picture where that strategy acquires evil/dangerous connotations, and of
course the meme cleverly plays on the right to possess and to draw
income, although the license actually doesn't prevent either.

> Could you explain in which way CC-BY is incompatible with GPL? (I have difficulties to grasp why claiming attribution is a problem)

I don't think that just claiming attribution is a problem, the devil
must hide in the extra prose, because the BSD licenses also retain the
claim to attribution, and are OK with the GPL:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses

So I'd rather leave the full answer to your question to the professional
lawyers who have made these claims. Apart from the links cited, there is
also a CC FAQ, straight from the Creative Commons guys, and they
probably are not lying:

http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions#Can_I_use_a_Creative_Commons_license_for_software.3F

"(...) Furthermore, our licenses are not
compatible with the GPL, the most frequently used free software license.

Note that the CC0 Public Domain Dedication is GPL-compatible and
acceptable for software. For details, see the relevant CC0 FAQ entry. "


  P.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4054 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/pipermail/tei-council/attachments/20110913/c5093729/attachment-0001.bin