[cc-community] Why "Wiki license" = CC-BY-SA?
andrewrens at gmail.com
Tue Jan 15 03:28:09 EST 2008
Your message bears no other name or designation. Who exactly are we speaking
You will find extensive scholarly examination of the incentives for
participation in collaborative communities in Yochai Benkler's book the
'Wealth of Networks', appropriately available for download under a Creative
This scholarly work sets out an empirical basis which supports what others
have already stated on this thread, that the possibility of appropriation
under an attribution only licence serves as a disincentive to contribute to
collaborative work such as Wikipedia.
Its also important to note that Creative Commons did not decide that
CC-BY-SA would be the licence to apply to Wikipedia, instead Wikipedia chose
copyleft, . It is noteworthy though that the most successful wiki in the
world was built using a copyleft licence.
Obviously you can freely choose to apply another Creative Commons licence to
It would be very useful if you could point to a successful wiki project
using A CC-BY licence for the purposes of comparison.
On 14/01/2008, v111p <v111 p at v111p.com> wrote:
> Does anybody here know why Creative Commons decided that the best license
> for a wiki site is CC-BY-SA, rather than, say, CC-BY or other non-copyleft
> license? Perhaps there is an explanation somewhere?
> cc-community mailing list
> cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
Now blogging at www.aliquidnovi.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cc-community