robkelk Wrote:This is a hell of a time to notice, with Geth gone...
Why are we using CC-BY-SA 4.0?
I've looked at the official FAQ for 4.0, and I don't like it. That version forces waiver of sui generis database rights and moral rights, without making it obvious that the waiver is required or what waiving those rights means to the editor. (For example, waiving one's moral rights to a contribution means that somebody can use that contribution in a smear campaign against the contributor.)
Is there any way to revert to CC-BY-SA 3.0, which doesn't appear to do a stealth grab of creators' rights? If not, then we really should mention that we're taking more than the editors might be willing to give.
EDIT: Wikipedia is looking at switching to 4.0 as well. I just cast an "Opposed" vote to that proposal.
Actually, I'm here (for a little while), it's was Labster's idea, and we are dual licensed under 3.0 and 4.0, and he liked the idea because unlike 3.0 it provided far more flexible "in case of a dispute over rights" running room.
Considering that 4.0 is basically reverse compatible with 3.0 and we have been operating on 3.0 this whole time with 4.0 as an option, and I don't believe it would be too difficult at all to simply cease allowing use of 4.0 as an option, since what we would have left is a perfectly acceptable set of nigh identical terms.
Considering that 4.0 is basically reverse compatible with 3.0 and we have been operating on 3.0 this whole time with 4.0 as an option, and I don't believe it would be too difficult at all to simply cease allowing use of 4.0 as an option, since what we would have left is a perfectly acceptable set of nigh identical terms.