If I'm understanding this correctly, the key aspect here is that a breach leads to termination of rights without opportunity of remedy. Isn't that relatively common in open source licenses, not just the Creative Commons ones?
I acknowledge that, as Cory describes, it's easy to create large quantities of media (e.g. stock photos) that is directly owned by a copyleft troll, as bait. But doesn't the problem also apply to open source software? While it's harder to software packages that will be so easily picked up by sufficient users to make the effort worthwhile, I can think of a couple of attacks here:
The attacker could fork a popular package under a permissive license, make minor changes, and re-release with a subtle renaming under a compatible license w/o remedy period.
More perniciously, the attacker could contribute changes to the original package which made use of media under the CC licenses or other licenses with a similar problem.
From: main@... <main@...>
On Behalf Of Shane Coughlan
Very little open source *code* is under Creative Commons licenses. However, a lot of open source *documentation* is under Creative Commons licenses. Therefore, we should keep an eye on this matter.
“Copyleft trolls, robosigning, and Pixsy”
OpenChain General Manager
Book a meeting: