Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Video of the FSUK talk from the 19th February

[Andy Halsall]

On Thursday 28 February 2008 21:17:11 MJ Ray wrote:
> Dave Page <address@hidden> wrote: [...]
>
> > I'm not sure what you mean by a "free software license".
>
> For example, the WTFPL is at http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/ (its author is
> the current Debian Project Leader, did you know?)
>
> No Problem Bugroff license is at http://tunes.org/legalese/bugroff.html
>
> You know they make sense.
>

With those licenses the work could be taken and incorporated into a larger 
work published under a non-free license.

That would mean that someone could see the talk, really want a copy, and find 
that the version they have seen is only available for $19.99, is DRM'ed and 
comes with a license that prevents them from doing anything with it at all 
other than watching it.

So in that sense I'd say both licenses fail in meting the conditions I wanted 
a license to meet, now although there are issues on the UK CC side, don't 
think they are all that major.

As for the CC logo issue, I would suggest that them revoking the right o use 
the logo without 'good cause' and enforcing it would (given what their 
primary business is) amount to estoppal.

Saying that I am not a lawyer and I am not paying mine to tell me.

Andy.