Jeff Spaleta wrote:
2008/6/10 Clint Savage herlo1@gmail.com:
What are the licensing options? I've never even looked into licensing video. If it were text, Open Publication License would work. Does that work for video?
It's going to be one of the more liberal CC licenses, perhaps something as liberal as CC-BY-SA. I'm going to make an arbitrary decision for now that for the time being people experimenting with Fedora videos license under CC-BY-SA, with an understanding that if the acceptable licensing changes as part of on-going discussions the video creators are willing to relicense the works accordingly.
Count me as a supporter of licensing as CC-BY-SA: it encourage others to remix our videos and also allows us to include in our videos stuff made by other people and licensed as CC-BY-SA.
From all the CC licenses, it seems the only viable options are CC-BY and CC-BY-SA (the other, NC and ND are *not free*).
Using a CC license could work also as a marketing vehicle, licenses as OPL are largely unknown, when people hear about something released under such license will react like "whatever, that is *some* content released under *some* license", but using CC will create more buzz. Also, we can try a collaboration with ccLiveContent (is that project still alive?)