Do we need yet another license?

Jump to: navigation, search

Several people in the free culture community say that a proliferation of licenses is problematical.

For whom and why?

What if the way someone wants to release their work is not represented in an existing license?

Ktucker (talk)16:33, 10 February 2008

Kim, I'm one of the several people <smile> -- who thinks that a proliferation of licenses is problematic.

  1. In my view -- we should respect the freedom of individuals to create select and use as many licenses as they want. But I don't think this is practical and we end up focusing on the tool rather than the values underpinning why one license is "libre" and another is not. The essential freedoms are the important bit in the equation -- not the mechanics of how we implement these in practice.
  2. I think that it's more important to spend time and energy in creating opportunities and resources to educate and inform folk about the essential freedoms rather than spending time and energy creating yet another license. So for example, regarding the attribution issue -- I think its more productive to lobby CC-Learn to bring back attribution as an option.
  3. The majority of teachers and educators I know already find the licensing to be complicated -- and I not sure they really care about the licenses they use. Typically -- a teacher might go to the CC site and click a couple of options -- eg NC feels good - so I'll select that one, without necessarily understanding the implications.
  4. I suppose there is a argument that a new "libre" license might simplify things -- for example, if you want to develop free content -- use this license, and avoid all the hassle of choosing from a plethora of options. That said -- I think it will take years before we have a mainstream solution. My view is to work with what we have got -- although not perfect, we can make it better. Already we have WMF thinking about ways to achieve compatibility between FDL and the CC-BY-SA license -- with thanks to a bold move by the FSF.

Kim asks:

What if the way someone wants to release their work is not represented in an existing license?

I'd say that we should lobby existing licenses to improve and meet their requirements <smile>. I don't think its on the best interests of the freedom culture to create another license fork. However -- if a fork will take us forward in the long run -- it will. These things are dependent on the eco-systems that support them.

Mackiwg (talk)21:03, 10 February 2008
Edited by another user.
Last edit: 21:01, 19 April 2011

What should we call such a Libre Ideal License? Is there a Spanish, English or other language word which somehow captures the essence of the following?

  • Licencia Libre Absoluto (or absolut ?)/Libre Absolute License
  • Licencia Libre Base/ Libre Base License
  • Licencia Libre Blanca/Clara - Libre Clear License
  • Licencia Libre Cabal/Absolutely Libre License
  • Licencia Libre Centro or Licencia Libre Núcleo/ Libre Core License
  • Licencia Libre Cero/Libre Zero License
  • Licencia Libre Completo/Libre Complete License or Completely Libre License
  • Licencia Libre Fundación/ Libre Foundation License
  • Licencia Libre Ideal/ Libre Ideals License
  • Licencia Libre Inclusivo/ Libre Inclusive License
  • Licencia Libre Perpetuo/Libre Perpetual License
  • Licencia Libre Conservar/Libre Preserved License
  • Licencia Libre Principio/ Libre Principle License
  • Licencia Libre Prístino/Libre Pristine License
  • Licencia Libre Puro/Libre Pure License
  • Licencia Libre sin procesar/Libre Raw License
  • Licencia Libre Universal/ Libre Universal License
  • Permeso Libera Eterna (Esperanto)
Ktucker (talk)10:50, 18 February 2008