On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 09:50:07AM -0500, inode0 wrote:
While not as common, something like the GNU All-Permissive License
seems like it might match your stated goals better in this case and is
really quite similar in spirit to the MIT License selected for code.
It isn't really a general content license but is intended for what is
commonly understood to be documentation included with code.
I think we considered that one briefly, and it's worth considering
again. The only drawback is that it is not a well-known and
widely-used license like the MIT license (the modern variant) is, or
like CC-BY-SA is. It would avoid the possible problem you have pointed
to.
There's also an argument that the Creative Commons licenses are better
for some kinds of creative content because they explicitly talk about
public display and public performance rights, but perhaps that's more
of a theoretical benefit in this context.
- RF