[cc-licenses] Clarification needed - Copyleft AND Share-Alike with Images
gmaxwell at gmail.com
Thu Feb 15 20:17:28 EST 2007
On 2/15/07, Peter Brink <peter.brink at brinkdata.se> wrote:
> B) The CC-licenses are designed to extend the scope of choices available
> for _creators_ and thereby indirectly extend the freedom of users to
> re-use. They are not designed to extend one creators control over other
> creators independent works.
If someone else distributes a new work which includes my work, it is
not an independent work. In the absence of a license which specifies
the terms under which they are permitted to perform acts normally
reserved for the copyright holder, we call such usage a copyright
It would appear, however, that your first point in (B), "CC-licenses
are designed to extend the scope of choices available for _creators_
", answers my question about the purpose of the CC-by-sa and other CC
licenses... Even still, I don't feel very able to choose when I find
out that SA isn't a proper copyleft or that NC is being redesigned so
that Web 2.0 profiteers can make a quick buck off the work of those
who have selected NC licenses.
I find it unfortunate that an organization which does not share the
goal of nurturing the creative commons has taken the title "Creative
Commons" for itself.
I guess it should be no surprise that an attempt to further
democratize the control of license selection would result in a tragedy
of the (creative) commons.
More information about the cc-licenses