On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:49:52PM -0400, Richard Fontana wrote:
Note BTW that CC-BY-SA 3.0 explicitly allows 'Adaptations' to be
licensed under "a later version of this License with the same License
Elements as this License". .
That is what brought be comfort during the relicensing process. I
didn't like the implications of the Fedora Project able to potentially
and arbitrarily relicense works without any other oversight or
guidance.[1] But the OPL didn't have the above clause the CC does.
I'm now comfortable that we can protect our free and open content with
the CC license alone, and if another default license is chosen in the
future, it will be fundamentally similar, thereby protecting the
freeness.
- Karsten
[1] Even while I was the one calling for using the 'nuclear option'.
--
name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener
team: Red Hat Community Architecture
uri:
http://TheOpenSourceWay.org/wiki
gpg: AD0E0C41