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

Clark C. Evans cce at clarkevans.com
Sun Feb 26 19:26:34 UTC 2012


This updated CC0 FAQ says: "CC0 is compatible with many software 
licenses, including the GPL".  I'm not sure how this is true 
since the GPLv3 has an explicit patent grant -- while it's the 
express intent and language of the CC0 to withold any patent 
license what so ever.  Do you mind explaining?

If I had a MIT license derived license together with 4d of 
the CC0, do you think that this would be an additional 
non-permissive term permitted by section 7 of the GPLv3 
even though explicitly witholding patent rights it isn't 
enumerated in a-f?  

I'm not a lawyer, so this is confusing to me.



On Sun, Feb 26, 2012, at 12:40 PM, Christopher Allan Webber wrote:
> Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber at creativecommons.org> writes:
> > PS: We will be making an adjustment to the CC0 FAQ on Monday... it's
> > already written, actualy.  It won't make a statement deprecating the
> > possible use of CC0 for software and will mostly remain the same, but
> > will have a note at the bottom noting that CC0 is not OSI approved.  We
> > figured that was a good compromise solution.
> Now updated:
> http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0_FAQ#May_I_apply_CC0_to_computer_software.3F_If_so.2C_is_there_a_recommended_implementation.3F
> _______________________________________________
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at opensource.org
> http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review

More information about the License-review mailing list