Paul Houle | 5 Jul 21:15 2010

Free Art License?

I had my webcrawler out looking for media objects the other day and I 
found some under this license:

http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en

Is it my imagination or is this license compatible with CC-BY-SA?
Rob Myers | 5 Jul 22:20 2010

Re: Free Art License?

On 07/05/2010 08:15 PM, Paul Houle wrote:
> I had my webcrawler out looking for media objects the other day and I
> found some under this license:
>
> http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en
>
> Is it my imagination or is this license compatible with CC-BY-SA?

Licences have to be *declared* compatible with CC-BY-SA.

This was one of the licences that has been mentioned as potentially 
compatible in the past. But it has not been declared compatible yet.

There are lots of little differences. The devil is always in the details...

- Rob.
Jon Phillips | 5 Jul 23:25 2010

Re: Free Art License?

It might not be a devil at all rob. It might just be that no one has
had the time to get to this.

Jon

On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Rob Myers <rob@...> wrote:
> On 07/05/2010 08:15 PM, Paul Houle wrote:
>>
>> I had my webcrawler out looking for media objects the other day and I
>> found some under this license:
>>
>> http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en
>>
>> Is it my imagination or is this license compatible with CC-BY-SA?
>
> Licences have to be *declared* compatible with CC-BY-SA.
>
> This was one of the licences that has been mentioned as potentially
> compatible in the past. But it has not been declared compatible yet.
>
> There are lots of little differences. The devil is always in the details...
>
> - Rob.
> _______________________________________________
> cc-community mailing list
> cc-community@...
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
>

--

-- 
(Continue reading)

Rob Myers | 5 Jul 23:51 2010

Re: Free Art License?

On 07/05/2010 10:25 PM, Jon Phillips wrote:
> It might not be a devil at all rob. It might just be that no one has
> had the time to get to this.

Because of all the other details they've had to take care of!!1

;-)

- Rob.
drew Roberts | 6 Jul 01:29 2010

Re: Free Art License?

On Monday 05 July 2010 17:25:23 Jon Phillips wrote:
> It might not be a devil at all rob. It might just be that no one has
> had the time to get to this.

One thing I don't like is French law ruling no matter where the "originating 
artist" is.
>
> Jon

drew
Claude Almansi | 6 Jul 08:09 2010
Picon

Re: Free Art License?

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:29 AM, drew Roberts <zotz <at> 100jamz.com> wrote:
> On Monday 05 July 2010 17:25:23 Jon Phillips wrote:
>> It might not be a devil at all rob. It might just be that no one has
>> had the time to get to this.
>
> One thing I don't like is French law ruling no matter where the "originating
> artist" is.

Yes, it can be problematic. Concrete case:

"Concours 2010 « Décris-moi la citoyenneté numérique »"
<http://www.ynternet.org/forumouvert/concours-2010-decris-moi-la-citoyennete-numerique>,
 is a writing competition in the context of 9e Forum eCulture in
Lausanne, Switzerland.

The Conditions de participation (pdf)
<http://ynternet.org/forumouvert/conditions-concours-v3-1.pdf> state
that the use of the LAL will be one of the 5 main assessment criteria
the jury will use ("Critères principaux: ... 5. Vous avez mentionné
en fin d'article qu'il est sous licence Art Libre
(http://artlibre.org/) ").

They  further indicate that the competition is realized by "la
fondation Ynternet.org, la HEPL du canton de Vaud et l'UNIL".
Ynternet.org has always advocated the LAL, but  it is slightly odd
that official Swiss institutions like HEPL (Haute école pédagogique du
canton de Vaud) and  UNIL (Université de Lausanne) should accept an
assessment criterium that imposes the use of a given license, moreover
one for which French Law applies.

(Continue reading)


Gmane