Hi,
I would like to know the FSF/FSFE's position on Creative Commons ( http://www.creativecommons.org ) and how the CC-by-sa 2.0 license (which is copyleft) compares with GFDL 1.2 for text works.
I know GFDL and CC-by-sa are not compatible, but I am interested to know the differences and similarities of these licenses (for books/articles and software) according to your views.
I am aware that with GFDL each distributor who distributes many copies of a GFDL document must also distribute the GFDL license. With CC, such action is not necessary if the distributer just gives an Internet link to the CC homepage. I think that the "relaxed" terms of CC on the license distribution could be a problem if, for example, the CC website goes down, but I also think that sometimes it might be difficult for someone to distribute the gfdl if, for example, he/she just wants to distribute a very short gfdl article. In addition, I see that some people don't like the idea of having to keep a changelog as gfdl requires, and they seem to prefer the more lightweight cc.
In my site (a wiki) I am about to allow per-page copyright terms so that each author can decide between gfdl and cc. (only the sharealike copyleft version). However I would like to know FSF's views on CC before proceeding to allowing more widespread use of CC. Does CC (the copyleft version) effectively protect works released under it?
I would like to ask, also, whether a document licensed under CC-by 2.0 (CreativeCommons Attribution license 2.0) can be incorporated in a GFDL text (provided that proper attribution will be included in the text).
Finally, I wish to know whether you are considering to provide some form of compatibility between CC and GFDL in the future (for example with a gfdl2 license)?
Thanks,