[cc-community] Orlowski vs. liblicense
Alek Tarkowski
alek at creativecommons.pl
Tue Aug 21 04:04:12 EDT 2007
Hello everyone,
I agree with Rob that Orlowski's objection, taken away the style and
argumentation, deserves to be answered. I think this issue returns again
and again: that people might not know what they're doing when they use
the license.
Jon wrote that the liblicense will default to "no free license", but
there are other projects that offer a CC license as a licensing default.
Personally I find this controversial - as it creates a body of freed
content, but not a pool of "free minds", which ultimately are important.
So if we don't want that, the question becomes what can we do to make
sure people understand what they are doing when licensing? For example,
I think many of the explanations / warnings that are now placed in the
faq file should be inserted, more centrally, into the licensing process,
as some form of interstitials?
Regarding the issue of licensing by children, Bodo Balazs once wrote a
great letter on this issue, I think at the time when the idea of a "cc
children" license was being discussed (maybe a year or two ago?). I wish
I knew how to find a link to it in the archives, but the general gist
was: "it's a bad idea". Yet we live in a society in which people that
are underage, by virtue of being creators are forced to be licensors as
well. So I think that we should think well before spearheading this
trend - even in the benign form of teaching OLPC laptop users about free
licensing.
alek.
--
koordynator / public lead
Creative Commons Polska / Poland
skype: alektarkowski
More information about the cc-community
mailing list