Add Free Art License

[xuv]

Free Art License 1.3

[strugee]

@xuv what does this license cover that the licenses already on ChooseALicense don't? Note that we already suggest Creative Commons for non-code works.

[xuv]

In terms of author's right, there is a difference between roman based code and english based code. This license was written in France and as such integrates a roman based version of the author's right such as the non-transferable moral rights while still being copyleft and compatible with a CC-BY-SA for example. Because of its European origin and particularity, it is sometimes the preferred choice for creators living in Europe over licenses originating from the US for example.

So although compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution Sharealike, they are different in philosophy and motivation for their own existence. And as such, this difference matters a lot for some creators.

There is also significant usage of it on Github (french and english version) for it to be included.

[benbalter]

@xuv thanks for starting the discussion. How would you explain to a developer releasing their first open source project (with no background in copyright or open source licensing) why they should prefer the free art license ver CC-BY-SA?

[xuv]

@benbalter I would say it like this:
Compared to the CC-BY-SA, the Free Art License is much shorter text to read. It is written in a form that is easier to understand by anyone, without most of the usual lawyer vocabulary, while still having the same properties and benefits. The text of the license also ends with a user guide. All these benefits come because it was mostly written by artists and creators for themselves and their audience.

People might also prefer it because there is only one Free Art License and it does not require to understand the whole feature naming scheme of Creative Commons. Without any background in open source licensing, there is no doubt with the Free Art License about it's intent and use.

[strugee]

The immediate concern I see is that it doesn't have any of the "usual lawyer vocabulary"... yes, that makes licenses harder to read, but it's there for a reason and I worry that the Free Art License would be harder to enforce in court. (That being said, I'm certainly not an expert.)

[xuv]

@strugee "usual lawyer vocabulary" was maybe not the best comment from me regarding this license. It has been reviewed by lawyers and they have not made any remarks regarding this. It was a way for me to emphasize its easier reading. To compare, the MIT license is also easier to read than similar ones.

But I can ask the creators if there is any examples where the license may have already been challenged in court or similar.

[strugee]

Ah, OK. Gotcha.

[xuv]

I've asked the creators about any case where the Free Art License had been tested.

To their knowledge, there is only one case, that was solved rapidly, which involved a musician that had his music used in a documentary aired on french television, but that was not credited. Credits were added immediately after the complain and displayed in later broadcasts of the documentary.

The creators also insist on the reliability of the license as it is based upon the author's rights, so there is no problem regarding its validation or invalidation.

[benbalter]

@xuv based on our new license criteria, the Free Art License will need an SPDX ID, but since it's on the OD list of approved licenses, once it has an SPDX ID, we can add it.

[xuv]

@benbalter Just submitted to SPDX. Will inform you of response.

[jlovejoy]

Hi there, we intend to add this license to the SPDX License List, but need to first sort out how to handle the 8 variations/translations they list on their website. I have contacted the license stewards and will let you know when I here back :)

• Jilayne (SPDX Legal co-lead)

[xuv]

Hello @benbalter and others.

Thx to the work of the SPDX list and @jlovejoy, I'm pleased to announce here that the Free Art License has been added to the SPDX list.

After discussion with the license creators, the french version of the license is the canonical one.
https://spdx.org/licenses/LAL-1.3.html

But English, Portuguese and Polish translations are available.

Hoping we can now add the LAL-1.3 to the Choosealicense website.

[mlinksva]

Great. @xuv do you want to create a pull request adding LAL-1.3?

[xuv]

@mlinksva Could possibly work on that. Will take me a while though. But when completed, I'll make a PR. If anyone else does it in the meantime, I'm also fine with it ;)

[Omidjamali023]

Very Nice