[cc-community] Reducing The Number Of Licenses

Rob Myers rob at robmyers.org
Fri Mar 6 07:13:52 EST 2009


On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Alan Cox <alan at lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Mar 2009 09:42:33 +0000
> Rob Myers <rob at robmyers.org> wrote:
>
>> Attribution's terms handle this.
>
> Not really

If someone wishes to misrepresent me they can take quotes out of
context or simply write a work of criticism with or without a CC
licence.

What is important is that a modified version of a work does not appear
under my name if it misrepresents my views. CC's licences cover this.

>> The requirement that modifications be identified as such handles this.
>
> Not in the eyes of the people I've dealt with - it's too easy to lose
> that information.

Losing that information loses you the right to use the work.

And it's just as easy to lose the fact that a piece is ND.

>> These may all require modification to remain legal if regulation changes.
>
> And in many cases that modification then needs to be certified or
> processed appropriately before a modified version can be created.

Sure.

But it can be done.

It cannot be done at all if you cannot modify the work.

>> "Interviewer: 'How do you feel about Hollywood ruining your work?'
>>
>> Alan Moore: 'What are you talking about, they didn't ruin my work, it
>> is right up there on the shelf.'"
>
> Except that most folks don't see it that way and Alan Moore would I am
> sure have preferred to block the Hollywood rework of this stories. A
> witticism does not make policy

It does however indicate that even the most anti-adaptation creative
genius can learn to live with even the most godawful adaptations.

- Rob.


More information about the cc-community mailing list