Open Source Content License (OSCL) - Other/Miscellaneous licenses

[OSCL Steward]

Well I the idea of not allowing licensing under something else like say GPL
is that GPL is different than the OSCL and I think that to allow derivative
works under a different license has problems, but at the same time I can see
your point.  I also have thought about it in the context of who would want
to start a collaborative project on our website if we make them put it under
our license or any specific license.  Perhaps the best method of dealing
with this would be to modify the mediawiki software we are using to allow
the original author of a page to determine it's license from a list of say
OSI approved licenses.

-----Original Message-----
From: Russ Nelson [mailto:nelson at crynwr.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 8:55 AM
To: OSCL Steward; license-review at opensource.org
Subject: Re: Open Source Content License (OSCL) - Other/Miscellaneous
licenses

John Cowan writes:
 > original.  This is not a problem in itself, but the proliferation of
 > such licenses is, because content licensed under one such license (say,
 > yours) and content licensed under another such license (say, the GPL)
 > cannot be brought together to form a work that is jointly derivative of
 > both works.  In essence, each such license creates a separate commons.

Unless the license says ".... or under the GPL", in which case the
existance of the license is fairly pointless.

-- 
--my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com   | Software that needs
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | documentation is software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241       | that needs repair.
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog          |