Difference between revisions of "Creative Commons"
From WosWiki
(→Mögliche Referenten) |
(→Material) |
||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
* [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html Lizenz-FAQ der Free Software Foundation] zur Creative Commons AttributionShareAlike License: "There is literally no specific freedom that all Creative Commons licenses grant. Therefore, to say that a work 'uses a Creative Commons license' is to leave all important questions about the work's licensing unanswered. When you see such a statement, please suggest making it clearer. And if someone proposes to 'use a Creative Commons license' for a certain work, it is vital to ask immediately 'Which one?' We recommend using the Free Art License, rather than this one, so as to avoid augmenting the problem caused by the vagueness of 'a Creative Commons license'". | * [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html Lizenz-FAQ der Free Software Foundation] zur Creative Commons AttributionShareAlike License: "There is literally no specific freedom that all Creative Commons licenses grant. Therefore, to say that a work 'uses a Creative Commons license' is to leave all important questions about the work's licensing unanswered. When you see such a statement, please suggest making it clearer. And if someone proposes to 'use a Creative Commons license' for a certain work, it is vital to ask immediately 'Which one?' We recommend using the Free Art License, rather than this one, so as to avoid augmenting the problem caused by the vagueness of 'a Creative Commons license'". | ||
| + | * [http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-community/2005-July/000639.html Benjamin Mako Hills Kritik der Creative Commons] | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [http://www.linuxp2p.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=10771 Richard Stallmans Kritik der Creative Commons] | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html Debians Kritik der Creative Commons] | ||
Back to [[Topics_of_Panels_and_Workshops]] | Back to [[Topics_of_Panels_and_Workshops]] | ||
Revision as of 15:26, 9 February 2006
Die derzeitigen Versionen der CC-Lizenzen sind Gegenstand diverser Kritik, allen voran:
- die Vielzahl verschiedener, zueinander inkompatibler Lizenzen (siehe die Kritik von Richard Stallman)
- das Fehlen eines Mindeststandards für Informationsfreiheit und, dementsprechend, die eigenen Lizenzen (siehe dazu die Kritik von Stallman sowie von Benjamin Mako Hill)
- die Inkompatibilität zur GNU FDL (unter der die Wikipedia steht)
- diverse Details, wegen denen sämtliche CC-Lizenzen nach Ansicht z.B. des Debian-Projekts die Mindeststandards von freien bzw. Open Source-Lizenzen verfehlen.
CC hat neue Versionen der Lizenzen angekündigt, die in dieser Hinsicht Verbesserungen bringen sollen. Es wäre interessant, darüber mehr auf der WOS zu erfahren.
Mögliche Referenten
- Vertreter von Creative Commons
- Benjamin Mako Hill
Material
- Lizenz-FAQ der Free Software Foundation zur Creative Commons AttributionShareAlike License: "There is literally no specific freedom that all Creative Commons licenses grant. Therefore, to say that a work 'uses a Creative Commons license' is to leave all important questions about the work's licensing unanswered. When you see such a statement, please suggest making it clearer. And if someone proposes to 'use a Creative Commons license' for a certain work, it is vital to ask immediately 'Which one?' We recommend using the Free Art License, rather than this one, so as to avoid augmenting the problem caused by the vagueness of 'a Creative Commons license'".
Back to Topics_of_Panels_and_Workshops
