[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:
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at opensource.org
More information about the License-review