Version 1.1 of the definition has been released. Please help updating it, contribute translations, and help us with the design of logos and buttons to identify free cultural works and licenses!

Licenses: Difference between revisions

From Definition of Free Cultural Works
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
This will be a list of licenses that meet the terms of the free content definition.
Tentatively, the following licenses are known to meet the criteria set out by the [[definition]]:
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ Creative Commons Attribution License]
* [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License]
* [http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html GNU Free Documentation License]
* [http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en/ Free Art License]
* All [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html free software licenses], including the GNU GPL, the BSD license, and various others. These are sometimes also used for works which are not software.
 
In addition, works in the [[w:public domain|public domain]] are also free content as per the definition.
 
To be verified:
* [http://www.wikiweise.de/wiki/Wikiweise%3AFreie%20Wiki-Lizenz Freie Wiki-Lizenz]
 
Controversial:
* [http://www.freecreations.org/Against_DRM.html Against DRM license] - very vague, legally speaking, about what exactly it tries to forbid. If it forbids use even for developing DRM, bundling with DRM, etc., it is not a free content license.

Revision as of 10:02, 25 April 2006

Tentatively, the following licenses are known to meet the criteria set out by the definition:

In addition, works in the public domain are also free content as per the definition.

To be verified:

Controversial:

  • Against DRM license - very vague, legally speaking, about what exactly it tries to forbid. If it forbids use even for developing DRM, bundling with DRM, etc., it is not a free content license.