On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 9:35 PM Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 03:40:42PM -0400, Richard Fontana wrote:
> > That sounds like a clerical update rather than actually any policy change,
> > so presumably we can just make the edit without sending out new
> > announcements, etc?
> Makes sense to me, but that's probably a question for the Fedora Council. :-)
Fair, so let me return a question to you. :) The change to be made would be:
1. Remove the clause "supplemented by Moral Rights Clause Waiver and GPL
Relicensing Permission" where that appears, and
2. the whole paragraph defining "Moral Rights Clause Waiver", and
3. replace "Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 Unported" in the FAQ
with "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0" where it appears, and
4. entirely remove the question in the FAQ referring to that clause.
Yes, but the "GPL Relicensing Permission" part was there for unrelated
reasons. I would remove that since (a) Creative Commons has declared
CC BY-SA 4.0 as one-way compatible with GPLv3, even though the
"Permission" in the FPCA covers a larger range of licenses, and (b)
this probably added more complexity than actual benefit. I doubt a
single question about reuse of CC BY-SA "content" in a GPL-licensed
work has come up in the years since the introduction of the FPCA. If
it were to come up, it could be dealt with on a case by case basis.
Is there anything we need to do to note that for content to which the
default license applies, the 4d waiver was waived? Or can that just be a
matter for the archives in the unlikely event it ever comes up?
I would leave it to the archives. It was a highly obscure point when
it was introduced and was essentially embedding a criticism of a flaw
in the 3.0 series of CC licenses into the FPCA, perhaps unjustifiably.