You mean they're equally copyleft unfriendly?
MM (my mileage) -- the CC one is vastly more copyleft unfriendly:
* most of the licenses that can be chosen from it are copyleft-incompatible. The only such choosealicense option is no license, which is relegated to bottom of page.
* no explanation of why one might want to choose a copyleft license; the only thing to go by is "share alike" might sound good. explanation on choosealicense could be improved, but at least exists.
* the one copyleft license that can be chosen (by-sa) is pretty weak.
Of course some of this can be chalked up to differing domains and history of those domains. But still there is no contest.
MM (my mileage) -- the CC one is vastly more copyleft unfriendly:
* most of the licenses that can be chosen from it are copyleft-incompatible. The only such choosealicense option is no license, which is relegated to bottom of page.
* no explanation of why one might want to choose a copyleft license; the only thing to go by is "share alike" might sound good. explanation on choosealicense could be improved, but at least exists.
* the one copyleft license that can be chosen (by-sa) is pretty weak.
Of course some of this can be chalked up to differing domains and history of those domains. But still there is no contest.