[License-review] CC withdrawl of CC0 from OSI process

[Thorsten Glaser]

Clark C. Evans dixit:

>I think there are a half-dozen approaches to copyright dedication,
>and great many software developers use "unlicense" over CC0 instead 
>since it's more in the *spirit* of BSD: short and to the point.  It 
>would be very nice to have one that is prepared by legal professionals.

Yes, please.

>I think if both the OSI and the FSF backed a single dedication /w 
>fallback license, you'd see people use it.

At least I hope so. CC is a known factor, and I’ve been lobbying
people to put fallback licences on their PD works recently (DJB,
the libtz people (#FAIL), pdksh¹, several hash implementations, …)
since the problem with it being local to one jurisdiction has been
brought up, and have had trouble with some of them (although only
the libtz people and SQlite are openly hostile).

① Got that covered; the initial author agreed to this:

.\" In countries where the Public Domain status of the work may not be
.\" valid, its primary author hereby grants a copyright licence to the
.\" general public to deal in the work without restriction and permis-
.\" sion to sublicence derivates under the terms of any (OSI approved)
.\" Open Source licence.

Maybe having CC0 approved would help there.

bye,
//mirabilos
-- 
  “Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having
          a peeing section in a swimming pool.”
						-- Edward Burr