[License-review] Request for approval of the Non-Coercive Copyleft Licence (NCCL) 1.0

[Tim Makarios]

*Rationale*
This proposed licence is intended to be as close as possible to what you
might think of as CC-0-SA.  That is, it is intended that the licence can
be used to completely (or as completely as possible) renounce the right
of the creator to compel or prohibit any action on the part of users of
the licenced work; that's the CC-0 part.  But it is also intended that
derivative works will be covered by the same licence; that's the SA
part.

A secondary goal of the licence is to be relatively short and
intelligible.

I would be willing to change the text of the licence if it would better
achieve these goals, or even to withdraw this request if someone can
point out an existing licence that achieves these goals.

*Distinguish*
Much of the text of the licence is based on that of the Simple Public
Licence (SimPL) 2.0, but the terms are substantially different.  What it
shares with the SimPL 2.0 (and the GPL-2.0, which the latter is intended
to be equivalent to) is the requirement that derivative works are
licensed under the same or substantially similar terms.  No attempt is
made in either the SimPL or the NCCL to define "derivative works";
presumably courts will interpret that phrase as they normally would.

Apart from the copyleft requirement, the NCCL is similar in effect to
very permissive licences, such as the ISC License.  However, the ISC
License reserves to the creator the right to sue redistributors of the
software and its derivatives if they fail to distribute the copyright
notice and licence with all copies of the software; the NCCL attempts to
make it impossible for the creator to sue redistributors for any such
omission.

*Legal review*
The SimPL 2.0 was written by a lawyer, but the NCCL itself has not yet
undergone any legal review.

*Proliferation category*
As far as I can tell, the NCCL doesn't clearly fall into any licence
proliferation category, so I recommend that it is categorized as
"Other/Miscellaneous".

*Earlier public discussions*
The NCCL has been opened to public comment [1], but so far no comments
have been made regarding the licence itself.

*Draft licence text*

Non-Coercive Copyleft Licence (NCCL) 1.0

The NCCL applies to a work of creativity (this is called the "Creative
Work") and comes with any rights that I have in it.  You agree to the
NCCL by relying on it for your right to copy, distribute, or make a
derivative work of the Creative Work.

If you get a copy of the Creative Work, then you get the irrevocable
perpetual royalty-free right to:
  * Use your copy of the Creative Work for any purpose;
  * Make and use derivative works of it (this is called a "Derived
Work");
  * Copy and distribute it and any Derived Work.

If you rely on this licence for your right to distribute a Derived Work,
you must give back to the community by agreeing that the Derived Work is
governed by this version of the NCCL or substantially similar terms,
without adding further restrictions to the rights provided.  If you do
not conspicuously announce which such licence governs the Derived Work,
then you agree that this version of the NCCL will govern it, and that I
and other people are allowed to rely on that fact.

There are some things that you must shoulder:
  * You get NO WARRANTIES. None of any kind;
  * If the Creative Work damages you in any way, you may only recover
direct damages up to the amount you paid for it (that is zero if you did
not pay anything). You may not recover any other damages, including
those called "consequential damages". (The state or country where you
live may not allow you to limit your liability in this way, so this may
not apply to you);
  * You are responsible for making sure that you do not use the rights I
give you under this licence in a way that would violate anyone else's
rights or any laws that apply to you.

*(End of licence text)*

Tim Makarios
<><

[1] http://wp.me/p2IaW7-8A