I was wondering about the meaning of this term in CC BY-SA 4.0 (and others), with this context:
In addition to the conditions in Section 3(a), if You Share Adapted Material You produce, the following conditions also apply. The Adapter’s License You apply must be a Creative Commons license with the same License Elements, this version or later, or a BY-SA Compatible License.
In the most extreme but perhaps not unthinkable case, what if Creative Commons releases a "CC BY-SA 5.0" license in the future that removes the requirements for attribution and copyleft -- or maybe even the disclaimer of liability? (The title would then be a misnomer, but I hope that isn't a legal requirement.) Yes, such a license would be incompatible with BY-SA 4.0 if it came from a third party, but the requirement of compatibility doesn't seem to apply for licenses coming from Creative Commons.
Under my interpretation, a third party Bob could then 'adapt' my (or any BY-SA 4.0 author's) code in his BY-SA 5.0 (or 6.0, 7.0, etc.) project. Then, transitively, any other programmer could take Bob's 5.0 work (which is really just my work) without crediting me or disclosing source.
So, here are my questions:
- Is my above interpretation correct?
- Are there any measures in place that would protect me from this happening, either legally binding (in the license) or not (e.g. a mission statement from CC or other nonbinding promise)?
- Is there a way for me to license my FLOSS works under CC-BY-SA 4.0 without allowing derivative works to be licensed under e.g. CC-BY-SA 5.0, like you can do with the GPL (by just saying 'v2 only')?