Print

Print


On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:18:58 -0500, Jörg Rhiemeier  
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Yes.  The ShareAlike clause is there for good reasons, I think.  After
> all, we don't want our documentation on FrathWiki to be hijacked by
> copyright sharks.  As far as I understand it, it means that if someone
> wants to include one of the conlangs documented on FrathWiki into a
> commercial media product, he still has to negotiate a license with
> the author rather than just using what is on FrathWiki without paying
> the author royalties.

That would be the Noncommercial ("NC") clause, if Frath's got that as part  
of its CC license. SA just means that derivatives of the conlangs  
themselves need to be SA. As far as I know, it doesn't stop some someone  
 from bundling *unmodified* content into a commercial product royalty-free.  
If Joe Q Filmmaker wants to add lexicon to a SA conlang for specific  
dialog in his film (for instance), he'd just have to publish that lexicon  
somewhere under an SA license.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. I don't even play one on TV.



--
Paul