Talk:Burning Life

vburn.org under incompatible license compared to SL Wiki

As indicated by a link in the footer of vburn.org, the content of the website is available under 16px BY-NC-ND 3.0 US. That is to say,

• BY- Attribution, author(s) (e.g. Wiki Contributors) must be attributed
• NC- Non-commercial, the work may not be used for commercial purposes
• ND- No Derivative Works, You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.
• US- the legalese is ported to United States legalese.

Whereas the Wiki content is available under

<spandir="rtl"title="CreativeCommons">

Error creating thumbnail: convert-im6.q16: delegate failed `'rsvg-convert' -o '%o' '%i'' @ error/delegate.c/InvokeDelegate/1928. convert-im6.q16: unable to open file `/tmp/magick-59511r_WRjvFFERy': No such file or directory @ error/constitute.c/ReadImage/600. convert-im6.q16: no images defined `PNG:/tmp/transform_715dd88ea220.png' @ error/convert.c/ConvertImageCommand/3258.

<spantitle="Attribution,Share-alike">BY-SA3.0

That is to say,

• BY- Attribution, author(s) (e.g. Wiki Contributors) must be attributed
• SA- Share-alike, derivative works must be available under the same license.

With regards to the Wiki license, a perfect example is the blog post on BurningLife.com. Although the entire blog is not available under a CC license, since the content of the post is taken from the SL Wiki, the terms of the license have been followed. Similar BY-SA adherence has occurred when people have republished Image:Agni.jpg.

The US-specific legalese likely isn't a problem for all intents and purposes (the SL Wiki isn't US-specific), but the lack of "Share-Alike", the inclusion of "Non-Commercial" and "No Derivative Works" may end up being restrictive with how Residents and the general public may re-use and republish the information/content.

SignpostMarv Martin 02:46, 18 August 2008 (PDT)