this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2021
6 points (100.0% liked)

Open Source

31945 readers
3 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Echedenyan@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 children)

NC licenses are not Free Culture licenses.

This should not be listed here.

[–] daelphinux@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 years ago (1 children)

Technical curricula are often licensed NC, if you don't people will use the curriculum at their school or university or their private program to resell.

This keeps the curriculum from being made proprietary.

[–] Echedenyan@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 years ago (1 children)

Libre != Gratis.

Reselling don't make the content propietary. With BY and SA they are forced to recognize and maintain the licensing model, making them entirely libre even if it costs money.

[–] daelphinux@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 years ago (1 children)

I wasn't talking just about reselling, I was talking about preventing the commercial use of technical curricula labelled as NC.

For some people it's less about the money and more about the desire to keep information and knowledge free. NC prevents commercialization of the product at hand. For something to be Gratis does not make it Libre, but for something to be truly Libre it must also be Gratis. Your equivalence implies a two way road where only a one-way street exists.

[–] Echedenyan@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 years ago

For something to be Gratis does not make it Libre, but for something to be truly Libre it must also be Gratis.

Sorry, but no.

Selling it doesn't prevent it to be Libre. That is the point I am addressing.