Relicense this content under Creative Commons BY 4.0 License

[parkr]

Every few months, a user will ask if they are free to reuse the wonderful branding that was created for Jekyll. The license is presently MIT, which is a bit vague for this kind of content – it is better suited for code. I propose here that we relicense the content under the terms of CC-BY 4.0, or the Attribution 4.0 license.

Approval required from @cobyism. Anyone else?

/cc @benbalter for a 👍 and whether we need to start asking folks to sign a CLA with a CC license.

[cobyism]

Approval required from @cobyism.

All good by me 👍. Let me know if you need something more official for legal purposes.

[benbalter]

@parkr is there a reason you chose the copyleft share-alike license? (which is closer to say GPL, than MIT). If I want to make a for-profit Jekyll sticker/shirt/mug, I should be able to, and should require attribution, but should not be required to grant the world a license to that mug/shirt/sticker.

[parkr]

is there a reason you chose the copyleft share-alike license?

@benbalter I wasn't aware there was a Creative Commons-like license which mimics the laissez faire nature of MIT. What do you recommend?

[benbalter]

@parkr See https://creativecommons.org/choose/. CC-BY (attribution required, same as MIT) is the closest to the MIT, but for non-code. CC-BY-SA (share alike) is copyleft, and is closer to GPL.

[parkr]

@benbalter I guess I like the idea of folks sharing back designs, etc of a mug/shirt/sticker. But I could see that being frustrating for companies, the entities which seem to dislike copyleft more than any other entities in the world. 😉 I'll update it.

[parkr]

@cobyism Would you mind re-confirming that you're cool with this? I removed the ShareAlike provision per @benbalter's recommendation.

[cobyism]

@cobyism Would you mind re-confirming that you're cool with this?

👍 Yep, I’m cool with this change.