Hot answers tagged

10

If downstream users of your project distribute it without including attribution for the CC-BY-licensed work, they are in violation of the terms of that CC-BY-licensed work. This is an obligation that copyright holder of the work has asked for as part of allowing redistribution of their copyrighted work. If someone redistributes the work without meeting that ...


3

If the site where you upload your work to requires you to select a license from a limited list of licenses and the license you want to (or are required to) use isn't in that list, then it is best to select the license that is closest to your desired license but is more restrictive. Then you can explain in a comment or description what the actual license is. ...


2

So is it possible to do something like so, # the GitHub repo LICENSE_FOR_DATASET_A # contains AGPL 3.0 license LICENSE_FOR_DATASET_B # contains CC-BY-4.0 license README.md # other repo files... Yes, that is possible, but you will need to have some way to indicate which files belong to dataset A (and thus are subject to the AGPL) and which ...


2

The cited Creative Commons page states that CC-BY-SA 2.0 and later are compatible with CC-BY-SA-4.0, and CC-BY is broadly compatible with CC-BY-SA. CC0 is essentially public domain, so it is also compatible. So you can use CC-BY-SA-4.0 for any modifications if you want. In any case, as a courtesy to whoever gets the package, you should state details on the ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible