[cc-licenses] NonDerivative NonCommercial Licenses
Ŭalabio‽
Walabio at MacOSX.COM
Fri Mar 3 20:30:15 EST 2006
Re: "Greg London" <Email at Greglondon.Com> & "Rob" <Rob at Robmyers.Org>:
Greg London" <Email at Greglondon.Com>:
> CC-NC-ND would be a license you might use if you wanted fans to be
> able to pass around your work as long as they didn't charge money
> and didn't modify the work. So, CC-NC-ND has it's uses. Yes, the
> licenses generally become more restrictive as they combine, but
> that's the side effect being tinkertoys.
> Greg
Under no circumstances would I ever use such an abomination. That
is exactly the sort of license I want banned. NC and ND is a
necessary evil so that people like Corey can make a living, but
people should have these three writes with CC-Licenses:
0. - The right to share the work without restriction.
1. - The right to read the work.
2. - The right to modify the work at least noncomercially.
ND for noncommercial forks violates number two. I would limit ND to
only commercial licenses and have it stated in licences with ND that
the ND does _"*NOT_APPLY*"_ to noncommercial use.
"Rob" <Rob at Robmyers.Org>:
> Quoting Greg London <email at greglondon.com>:
>> To suggest combining ShareAlike with NoDerivatives is a red flag
>> that there is some kind of fundamental misunderstanding going on.
>> And I can't quite figure out where it is.
> Yes I'm confused as well.
It is quite simple:
The conditions of the licenses are like ANDs and NOTs:
BY:
AND
SA:
AND
NC:
NOT
ND:
NOT
If we limit ND to only commercial licenses and place in the text for
ND that it only applies to commercial uses and is null and void for
noncommercial uses, then it is is:
"If commercial, then no derivatives. ¡STOP! If noncommercial allow
derivatives and go onto next term if present."
In other words, it means "If then". Let us read the version three
license CC-BY-ND-SA for commercial and noncommercial purposes:
CC (LicenseType) BY (AND credit author(s)) ND (NOT allowed
commercial derivatives. ¡STOP!) SA (halted at previous line)
If I wanted to modify the work for noncommercial use such as
education, the license would read thus:
CC (LicenseType) BY (AND credit author(s)) ND (NOT allowed
commercial derivatives, but this is noncommercial derivative so this
line does not apply. Go to next line.) SA (AND share this work
alike noncommercially).
Basically, I believe that at the heart of all CC-Licenses, should be
these freedoms:
0. - The right to share the work without restriction.
1. - The right to read the work.
2. - The right to modify the work at least noncomercially.
In accordance with these rights, ND should only be allowed with
commercial licenses and simply not apply to noncommercial uses of
commercially licensed works. ¿Do you understand now?
I would like to submit these ideas about inviolable rights which all
CC-Licenses must uphold to Creative Commons. ¿How do I do that?
—
Walabio
More information about the cc-licenses
mailing list