On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Angela <beesley(a)gmail.com> wrote:
One problem is their funding can be interpreted as
meaning the content
should only be made available to the public _in the UK_. Which led to
the strange "UK only licence" at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/creativearchive/licence/index.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/virtualrevolution/licences/digitalrevolution_licence.s…
is a second example of them making up their own license.
They have also released some things under a real Creative Commons
license, but as far as I know, only ever one of the "non-commercial"
ones. eg
http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/13946
Thanks for the links, they've led me to some content I didn't know about.
A shame they've made their own licence. I suppose I understand the
'non-commercial' aspect. Still, perhaps they can be persuaded towards
Wikipedia friendliness.