[OSM-legal-talk] License Cut-over and critical mass

[Anthony]

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Emilie Laffray
<emilie.laffray at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 26 July 2010 17:19, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
>>
>> Consider the LGPL.  If I have software under CC-BY-SA, and I want to
>> include an LGPL library, can I do it?  No.  Not because I'm violating
>> the LGPL, but because I'm violating CC-BY-SA.
>>
>
> Could you please point out to me code that is actually licenced under
> CC-BY-SA or any place where people are suggesting to you CC-BY-SA for code?

Of course not.  Well, I guess there's
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_with_example_pseudocode
, but for the most part, no.

> CC-BY-SA is used for creative output, while free software licences are used
> for code.

Unfortunately, there's only one copylefted free software license I
could think of, the GPL.

> Right now, that example doesn't make sense. If you want to prove something,
> you should really start to use meaningful examples with real examples
> instead of some really far fetched scenarios that are unlikely to happen in
> the first place. I don't know of any sane project that would licence code
> under CC-BY-SA in the first place.

If you've got a better example, feel free to present it.