[Open-access] [open-science] Open Science Anthology published

[Mike Taylor]

On 23 January 2014 14:39, Pierre-Carl Langlais
<pierrecarl.langlais at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm still a little annoyed to see that the debate focuses heavily
> on CC-BY v. CC-NC. Both of theses licenses are quite unclear and do not
> create an effective legal security for reuse. CC-BY sounds as an uncomplete
> viral license.

Just as a point of information (and taking no position for the moment
on which of the various licences is to be preferred): CC By is not a
viral licence. That term has a specific meaning --see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_license -- that downstream works
must use the same licence: something that CC By explicitly does not
require. CC By-SA is viral, and so is the GNU GPL.

For more, see
http://svpow.com/2013/02/08/what-is-a-viral-licence/

-- Mike.