freemedia wrote:cataclysm-dda::hyperbola:31:[nonfree] uses CC BY-SA for software
cc by-sa 4.0 is gpl3 compatible. source: fsf licenses page i believe (also email with rms, who corrected me as i thought all cc licenses were gpl-incompatible except cc0.)
cc by-sa 4.0 is not gpl 2 compatible, and previous versions of cc by-sa may not be gpl compatible. but by-sa 4.0 and gpl 3 are. which at the very least, means cc by-sa 4.0 can be used as a free software license and isnt non-free (even if it is a stupid license choice for software.)
The
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
page shows information about that license.
Also this forum topic also has information about it.
https://forums.hyperbola.info/viewtopic … 7496#p7496
archived here
https://web.archive.org/web/20240124215 … 7496#p7496
Though
https://creativecommons.org/faq/#can-i- … o-software
also shows this may only be for GNU GPL version 3 only, unless everyone that contributed any code/art to cataclysm-dda agrees to later versions also.
Otherwise I think it may get stuck under GNU GPL version 3 only.
I think cataclysm-dda has over 1000 contributors/copyright_holders, and all of them will need to agree to a "GNU GPL version 3, or (at your option) any later version" to make it possible to use any later version of that license.
The Linux kernel I think has some parts under GNU GPL version 2 only, so that makes all of the Linux kernel 2 only, unless all the contributors/copyright_holders agree to letting users choose a later license.
Because Creative Commons lists only version 3 of the GNU GPL on its compatible licenses list, it means that you can not license your adapted CC BY-SA works under the terms of “GNU GPL version 3, or (at your option) any later version.” However, Section 14 of the GNU GPL version 3 allows licensors to specify a proxy to determine whether future versions of the GNU GPL can be used. Therefore, if someone adapts a CC BY-SA 4.0 work and incorporates it into a GNU GPL version 3 licensed project, they can specify Creative Commons as their proxy (via https://creativecommons.org/share-your- … licenses/) so that if and when Creative Commons determines that a future version of the GNU GPL is a compatible license, the adapted and combined work could be used under that later version of the GNU GPL.
Maybe it is under the blacklist because the Hyperbola developers, as well as me, would like the option to use a later license also, but I do not know.
The
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.ht … patibility
shows what may be legally compatible with what.
There is also "linking" things in the licenses.
So "linking" may also affect a program.
I see with
shows that Cataclysm-DDA is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License at this time.
It also has SIL OPEN FONT LICENSE Version 1.1 in it.
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
shows
SIL Open Font License 1.1 (#SILOFL)
The Open Font License (including its original release, version 1.0) is a free copyleft license for fonts. Its only unusual requirement is that when selling the font, you must redistribute it bundled with some software, rather than alone. Since a simple Hello World program will satisfy the requirement, it is harmless. Neither we nor SIL recommend the use of this license for anything other than fonts.
So I do not know about all the compatibility.
Or if it meets any Hyperbola's policy standard or policy.
Maybe needing to be bundled with some software, rather than alone, is not up to Hyperbola's standard. Or the possibility of being stuck under GNU GPL version 3 only.
https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id … l_contract
shows in part
Hyperbola is free culture: All documentation and cultural works included in Hyperbola are free culture, with the exceptions of: works stating a viewpoint, invariant sections and cover texts. All documentation and cultural works created by or for Hyperbola are free culture, with no exceptions. We focus only on community-driven projects and software. Everything else driven by singular interests is foremost kept out as there can be no free and libre culture under pure orientation for those perspectives: There is no breaking of portability, ignorance for backwards compatibility and replacements of existing services, no enforcing into adoption with Hyperbola. The user is and will be always in command of the full system, as the freedom of choice and technical emancipation being essential for us!
