[cc-community] Simplifying Licenses

jonathon jonathon.blake at gmail.com
Fri Mar 6 06:49:59 EST 2009


On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:18, drew Roberts  wrote:
>> a)  Some people use the NC license, with the hope/expectation that re-distribution of the work will be gratis to the recipient.    (And
> There are better ways to ensure this if this is what they wish.

Perhaps. Crafting a good license is very hard work, and very
expensive.   Most organizations that want their content distributed
gratis don't have the money to pay for the license crafting that is
needed.

Whilst license expansion isn't desirable, replacing the "-NC" licenses
with half a dozen different licenses, each of which has a different
purpose and function, will provide greater ease in determining which
CC license is most congruent with what the potential user is trying to
achieve.

EG:

* CC-Gratis, which mandates that the recipient not incur an additional
expenses in receiving the work. The work can not be used as part of a
premium, or anything else which can be construed as revenue
generation.  This includes attempts to recoup some of the production
or distribution costs, regardless of how that attempt is made.
Non-Profit doing a charity auction may not use the content as a "thank
you" or "premium incentive".  A retail store may not give away the
content, either by itself, or in conjunction with anything else.  An
organization may not use the content as part of a commercial,  print
add, or marketing campaign.

* CC-Social activism, which permits biological individuals, and
501(c)3 organizations to utilize the material for any purpose that
they desire;

* Whatever the other purposes/functions that those who select the NC
option are trying (and failing) to achieve by using it;


jonathon


More information about the cc-community mailing list