[cc-community] What does NC means?

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Wed Sep 19 20:32:31 EDT 2007


On Wednesday 19 September 2007 07:58 pm, jonathon wrote:
> Terry wrote:
> > Mainly though, I think the situation would be even better if the CC
> > licenses were not treated as one block for promotional purposes, but
> > rather recognized as members of entirely different licensing families.
>
> +1
>
> > Another benefit of this approach might be the invigoration of better
> > modules (in each family).
>
> +1
>
> Or licenses that are compatible with each other, but address issues
> for a specific media.
> EG:  A clause that defines "non-commercial" for photography in
> CC-BY-NC-SA-photo and a clause that defines "non-commercial" for
> paintings in CC-BY-NC-SA-painting.

This could perhaps have benefits, but could also have major drawbacks when 
people want to move between those mediums.
>
> >Or perhaps the energy needs to go into providing a better support
>
> framework oriented towards real "free" licensed works like By-SA?
>
> The major issues are the non-libre licenses. Dropping them, or
> rebranding them would have to occur first.

I don't know about that, as much as I dislike NC and the confusion of calling 
of all the licenses by the name creative commons, since I am mainly 
interested in using BY-SA for my own works, I would naturally prefer to see 
BY-SA improved first...
>
> > Which is IMHO, "suboptimal". :-)
>
> +1
>
> xan
>
> jonathon

all the best,

drew


More information about the cc-community mailing list