Universal license for code and assets

[Lyberta]

Deleted.

[Vandar]

While I think that CC intentionally focuses on the freedom of the product and not the sources, I can see what you have in mind. Maybe time to get some legal help and make such a license?

[Huitsi]

What's wrong with using (A)GPL for assets?

1. Source Code.

The "source code" for a work means the preferred form of the work
for making modifications to it. "Object code" means any non-source
form of a work.

[Vandar]

I seem to remember that GPL wasn't advised for artwork, but I forgot the details.

One point that I see is for those who use the "CC-By" type licenses - GPL does not require to name the original author. So people who think the "By" clause is importent for them can't use the GPL.

Edit - not sure if this is of importance. The are CC*NC licenses, which are "not for commercial use". GPL also does not cater for that case. GPL can be used commercially.