42 lines
1.3 KiB
Plaintext
42 lines
1.3 KiB
Plaintext
The following is an excerpt from a three-way email discussion that took
|
|
place on 2012/2/20 and 21.
|
|
|
|
Chris Borowiec:
|
|
James and Tim,
|
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the 2.0 version doesn't allow adaptive
|
|
works, while 3.0 does.
|
|
|
|
We encourage adaptive works, provided they have our permission to do
|
|
so. It appears (to me) that 3.0 says "do whatever you want with it",
|
|
and I don't really like the sound of that.
|
|
|
|
Please let me know if I'm missing something. Tempus Irae can be freely
|
|
distributed, but if you're going to muck with it (aside from creating
|
|
some levels with what's already there), we would like to be asked if
|
|
it's OK first.
|
|
|
|
Thanks,
|
|
Chris B.
|
|
----------
|
|
Tim Larson:
|
|
I think you're speaking more of the difference between the BY-NC-ND
|
|
(No Derivatives) flavor and the BY-NC-SA (Share Alike) flavor of the
|
|
CCPL. It sounds like ND speaks better to your intent than SA does.
|
|
If you explicity give permission, that overrides the license terms, of
|
|
course, so that situation is covered too.
|
|
|
|
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd-nc/1.0/
|
|
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/
|
|
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/
|
|
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/
|
|
----------
|
|
Chris Borowiec:
|
|
Tim,
|
|
2.5 seems to work for me. Any input James?
|
|
|
|
Thanks,
|
|
Chris B.
|
|
----------
|
|
James Hastings-Trew:
|
|
Yep, sounds good to me. Decision made. NEXT!
|