Creative Commons

[Chris DiBona]

I'd like to point out that the cc is specific when you ask them that they
are not in the software licensing business and reccomend using an
established open source license that meets your needs for code.

Chris

On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 8:11 PM, Raj Mathur <raju at linux-delhi.org> wrote:

> On Tuesday 05 Aug 2008, Somik Raha wrote:
> > [snip]
> > However, some contributions will be in the form of powerpoint
> > templates, and the Create Commons Attribution license seems to be
> > simple enough to allow for commercial and non-commercial usage, while
> > keeping it open. AFAIK, not all CC licenses are OSI-compliant, and I
> > could not find any CC licenses on the OSI list that have been
> > approved. Interestingly enough, OSI's homepage uses a CC license.
>
> The reason you don't find the CC licences on its web site is that OSI
> does not approve any licences other than software licences.  Being the
> Open Source Initiative, their mandate is (at least currently)
> restricted to the software domain.
>
> However, I don't see how you can go wrong using one of the CC licences,
> which are the de-facto standard for open document publishing and
> implicitly approved by the OSI by use.  Any OSI board member (I used to
> be one) would probably advise you to choose the CC licence that meets
> your needs and go ahead with it.
>
> Regards,
>
> -- Raju
> --
> Raj Mathur                raju at kandalaya.org      http://kandalaya.org/
>       GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5  0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F
> PsyTrance & Chill: http://schizoid.in/   ||   It is the mind that moves
>



-- 
Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc.
Google's Open Source program can be found at http://code.google.com
Personal Weblog: http://dibona.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20080804/5320643c/attachment.html>