[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