Just saw a CC No Derivatives licensed artwork fly through my timeline. I have opinions on -ND:

Short version:
ND doesn't stop bad things (say, appropriation) from being done, while stopping good things (say, translation) from being done.

On a broader level it makes promoting and building libre-culture together harder.

ShareAlike is as effective at stopping some bad things (say, corporations using stuff in ads) from happening, while explicitly allowing the good.

I dive deeper into my reasoning in the blogpost (inb4 "like and subscribe").

Sorry about the subtoot (kinda-sorta), but didn't want to jump into the artist's thread and do a reply-guy thing.

Obviously everyone has the right to choose whatever license they like and feel suits them best!

But I feel there is a lot of mythos around what No Derivatives can and cannot do, and I believe it is harmful to the broader libre culture movement.

Semi-related, there is a batch of new "anti-capitalist" software licenses that is getting traction. I have similar problems with them as I have with NC and ND. I guess I should write them up, too.

But tl;dr would be: fragmenting the FLOSS codebase by using incompatible and legally unclear software licenses like that is shooting ourselves in the foot; AGPL achieves the same (big corporate capitalist entities stay the fsck away), without causing that much legal incompatibility/fragmentation.

@rysiek And if you need one in another language, the EUPL is available in 23 languages, and is similar to and downstream-compatible with AGPL.
"For the same reasons that the AGPL is banned, the use of EUPL-licensed software is not allowed at Google."

@owl @rysiek The EUPL is actually designed explicitely for public bodies that want to release their software as #FOSS.

Last I checked it was an OK license, but you wouldn´t really use it for your project unless you were a public sector organization.

(I was involved in developing the early versions, not sure where it´s gone from there.)

@kgerloff @owl @rysiek We are using it at @teckids_eV for @AlekSISorg because it is available in many languages and quite short, thus much easier to grasp for (especially young) beginners.

Why would it not be suitable for organisations that are not public bodies, in your opinion?

@Natureshadow @owl @rysiek @teckids_eV @AlekSISorg I think that’s a wonderful use for the #EUPL! It is definitely suitable for that purpose.

The license is designed primarily with public-sector organizations in mind (hence all those translations). But it is a fully functional #FOSS license, and compatible with lots of other licenses.

@Natureshadow @owl @rysiek @teckids_eV @AlekSISorg The only potential downside I can see is that downstream recipients might not be familiar with the #EUPL, and therefore reluctant to re-use the software.

But there’s always the compatibility mechanism, which is either refreshingly straightforward or brazenly hamfisted, depending on your taste.

@Natureshadow @owl @rysiek @teckids_eV @AlekSISorg Btw, watching the European Commission write to the OSI license approval list was quite a culture-clash moment

@rysiek @Natureshadow @owl @teckids_eV @AlekSISorg Oh, and the other theme was „perhaps we as the European Commission could negotiate with the FSF and the OSI about the definition of Free Software”.

Fortunately this idea was not pursued in the end 😅 That wouldn’t have gone so well.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon for Tech Folks

This Mastodon instance is for people interested in technology. Discussions aren't limited to technology, because tech folks shouldn't be limited to technology either!