Creative Common Copyright Notice in Standalones
ambassador at fourthworld.com
Thu Nov 11 11:00:16 EST 2010
Mark Wieder wrote:
> (disclaimer: the Creative Commons License rather explicitly states
> that it shouldn't be used for software, but that's what I use anyway
> because it comes the closest to exactly what I want my licensing to
> say for an open source project)
Why does CCL have that limitation?
It's so useful, and I haven't found another license that fits some of
the scenarios I'd like to deploy in as well as that one.
> What I do is create a custom property and file the license away in it:
> put "This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5
> License. To view a copy of this license, visit
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ or send a letter to
> Creative Commons, 543 Howard Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco,
> California, 94105, USA." into tCCLicense
> set the uRIP["EULA"] of this stack to tCCLicense
> then you can grab it from the custom property and display it however
> you want:
> put the uRIP["EULA"] of this stack into field "License"
Nice to see the RIP spec getting even more use.
For those who aren't familiar with RIP properties, check out Ken Ray's
Edinbugh Core Metadata Initiative (ECMI) spec at the Rev
Interoperability Project, in the Files section:
ECMI is a collaborative community effort to suggest a common set of
properties for common things like licensing, update info, versioning, etc.
There's also another initiative started there that could use some help
for those so inclined: a proposal to create a public domain behavior
script for field objects to provide data validation and masking. Feel
free to jump in.
LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
LiveCode Journal blog: http://LiveCodejournal.com/blog.irv
More information about the Use-livecode