[Clipart] BSD vs. CC vs. Public Domain

Sigmascape1 at cs.com Sigmascape1 at cs.com
Tue Apr 13 10:15:06 PDT 2004

>Message: 1
>Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 06:51:04 -0400
>From: Glenn Randers-Pehrson <glennrp at comcast.net>
>Subject: Re: [Clipart] Clipart License
>To: Daniel Carrera <dcarrera at math.umd.edu>
>Cc: clipart at freedesktop.org
>Message-ID: < at mail.comcast.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>At 03:47 AM 4/13/2004 -0400, Daniel Carrera wrote:
>>Hi guys,
>>I was wondering if we could improve upon the "public domain" idea for 
>>clipart by instead using a BSD-style license.  Such a license would no 
>>present any restrictions on the use clipart, so in practical terms it's just 
>>as good as public domain.  But the author might feel more confortable with 
>>the idea of retaining ownership over his or her work.
>>Does this sound reasonable?
>>If it does, I will contact Lawrence Lessig and ask him if he would be 
>>willing to prepare a Creative Commons license which is essentially ammounts 
>>to "all is permitted". 
>CC already does.  Look at their page where you "choose a license".
>There is Public Domain, Attribution (two flavors), GPL, LGPL.
>The more generous of the "attribution" licenses seems appropriate.  It
>is equivalent to BSD, MIT, and zlib/libpng licenses.


For some of my artwork, I have used the CC Atribution license, and I am happy with it. A BSD-style license is ok with me, but I still feel that for what we are doing that dedicating content to the public domain is far superior. Simply put, once something is in the public domain, there are ZERO strings attached.

Mitch Featherston

More information about the clipart mailing list