[cc-community] CC+?
drew Roberts
zotz at 100jamz.com
Sat Oct 6 10:20:34 EDT 2007
On Saturday 06 October 2007 09:55 am, Terry Hancock wrote:
> Nathan Yergler wrote:
> > Basic information is in the wiki at
> > http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CCPlus.
>
> Interesting. I see how this relates to the problems surrounding NC
> licensing, and I applaud that.
>
> The ability to license NC content commercially via a clearinghouse would
> be a big step forward. It sounds like it's basically what Magnatune has
> been doing, but generalized.
>
> Nevertheless, it still seems to be mostly disjunct from the problem of
> moving content from NC to SA domains, even though, in principle, a
> similar mechanism could be used.
>
> Is there any plan within the CC+ concept to allow for that?
>
> IOW, collective buy-off of the NC term so that works go from
> CC-By-NC/CC-By-NC-SA to CC-By/CC-By-SA if the author is satisfied with
> the offer?
Bingo! A+++ for that. I have been trying to talk up a similar plan for years.
It could of course also go from CC BY-NC to CC BY-SA instead if the creator
so specified.
Naturally, this would be complicated somewhat in the remix areas. I could only
go from CC BY-NC to CC BY-SA on original works or works with side
permissions.
Can someone think of a generalised, up frint mechanism to handle this problem?
But I want to give my hearty endorsement to a plan along these lines for so
long as CC keeps the NC and ND licenses around.
>
> The use of a clearinghouse approach would make that much simpler as
> multiple offers could be pooled so that popular works might be purchased
> into the free commons by multiple interested parties.
>
> My concept is that the author simply posts a "freedom price" on the work
> via the clearinghouse, and the clearinghouse simply sums standing offers
> to meet it. There are also some outside fundraising systems like
> "fundable.com" that could take care of the actual pooling process if
> it's not considered desireable to do it through CC+.
>
> Then the only requirement on CC+ is to permit this kind of general
> license-change offer instead of entity-specific limited licensing (I
> imagine this puts some requirements on metadata schema, etc).
>
> Cheers,
> Terry
all the best,
drew
More information about the cc-community
mailing list