[cc-licenses] Alex Bosworth: "Creative Commons Is Broken"

Greg London email at greglondon.com
Mon Mar 6 17:15:44 EST 2006


Mia,

You refer to
http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5752
but that doesn't contain any guidelines.

That weblog entry contains links to:

A post by you in April 2005 saying NC meant NotForProfit,
that money could exchange hands
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-education/2005-April/000278.html

A post by me in response to your "NotForProfit" explanation
that you label as "considerable consternation"
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2005-April/002160.html

A link to a "non commercial use case" which explains how
one website (Schmap) uses the NonComemrcial license.
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/NonCommercial_use_cases

A link to your international affiliates:
http://creativecommons.org/worldwide/

A link to Laura Lynch's entry on CC's "About" page:
http://creativecommons.org/about/people#19

A link to a post by Bruno Nessuno on the CC-License mailing
list asking about how to use NC in Jan 2006
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2006-January/003104.html

A link to a post by you on the CC-License mailing list
talking that looks quite a bit like weblog/entry/5752

A link to join the CC-License page
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses

None of the links in the weblog entry 5752 are actually the
Proposed NonCommercial Guidelines. I had to go through them
twice before I figured out that they were contained in a
link in your Jan 2006 post to CC-Licenses. At the bottom,
after half a dozen other URL's.

For those who are still with me, the guidelines are posted

http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/attachments/20060110/02d7a271/NonCommercialGuidelinesclean-0001.pdf

Which is a very long and unruly URL to be passing around.
And as far as I can tell, the only access to it is via
the CC-License archives, which isn't exactly a cake-walk
to wander through when you're looking for an old post.
Believe me, I've waded through the archives on a rare and
painful occaision.

If you would like to enable a discussion about these guidelines,
may I recommend creating a short page that has at the very top
some title such as Non Commercial Guidlines and a link to the PDF?

Then in the middle, put an explanation as to the background
and why these guidelines were created. Use as few links as
possible. Links to mailing list archives should be dropped.

Have a paragraph that explains what exactly you're looking
for (feedback? changes? requests for changes? complaints?
concerns?) and how you would like to recieve that feedback
(I assume the CC-License list?)

And then have at the very bottom, a link to the PDF in
big bold letters that says "Read the guidelines here".

Then, on the front page of http://www.creativecommons.org
one of your webheads needs to add a link that says something
like "NonCommercial Guidelines here".

The page must be accessible easily from the top.
If you want this discussed by lots of poeple,
make sure anyone who comes to CC's main website
can find it. Make it so that anyone who is discussing
these guidelines can find them without going into the
mailing list archives. Generally, when I'm discussing
some license on the mailing list, I go to Creative Commons
main page, then surf down to the license text. THen I only
have to remember http://www.creativecommons.org, I don't
have to bookmark anything, and I don't have to keep old
emails around in my inbox.

It should also have a nice URL such as
http://www.creativecommons.org/noncommercial_guidelines.pdf
so that those who want to really go through it with a fine
tooth comb can bookmark it and pass it around in an email
to their friends without the line wrapping function
cutting the URL in half, or thirds.

Greg "considerable consternation" London



> so people criticising CC for a vague definition of NonCommercial is
> wearing a little thin with me. for 9 months we worked on some
> guidelines to try to encapsulate what the different communities
> understood "NonCommercial" to mean....a discussion draft of the
> guidelines was posted on January 10, 2006; see: http://
> creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5752.
>
> so far there have been 2 comments on these.  if you think the
> definition is too vague & CC should do something to clarify it -
> let's discuss these guidelines!!!
>
> thanks,
>
> mia
> http://creativecommons.org/about/people#36
>
> On Mar 6, 2006, at 7:39 AM, rob at robmyers.org wrote:
>
>> "At MashupCamp the other day, I addressed a couple of my concerns
>> about Creative
>> Commons to Larry Lessig."
>>
>> http://www.sourcelabs.com/blogs/ajb/2006/02/
>> creative_commons_is_broken.html
>>
>> Via Rumori.
>>
>> - Rob.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cc-licenses mailing list
>> cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
>
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
>


-- 
Bounty Hunters: Metaphors for Fair IP laws
http://www.greglondon.com/bountyhunters/



More information about the cc-licenses mailing list