[Wikipedia-l] Creative Commons Licence

• Previous message: [Wikipedia-l] Creative Commons Licence
• Next message: [Wikipedia-l] Creative Commons Licence
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Anthony DiPierro wrote:

> Not sure what's *horrible* about no derivative works.  Wikipedia 
> doesn't need to alter most images.  I'd take cc-nd over copyrighted 
> with fair use.  If cc-nd is completely unacceptable, then so is fair 
> use, right?
>
> A
>
>> It seems obvious to me that No Deriviative Works is completely
>> unacceptable.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikipedia-l mailing list
>> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>
>>  
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
I've dual licensed my images under cc-by-sa (attribution, share alike). 
This seems to closest to the GFDL and I believe to be copyleft.

Caroline/Secretlondon

• Previous message: [Wikipedia-l] Creative Commons Licence
• Next message: [Wikipedia-l] Creative Commons Licence
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]