zotz at 100jamz.com
Sun Jan 14 07:48:16 EST 2007
not that I like the idea I am putting forward, but I think with this tweak I
might address tom's issue.
RY=X,0 instead which would mean you can use commercially at X% or as NC. Your
Or even RY=X,SA which would mean you can use commercially at X% or as SA. Your
My issue is that I want to promote Free Works and to me, this just further
muddies the waters.
Even with the second option, it woild only really be clean for first
generation reuse or for reuse where all X's are equal. It could get hairy
I have even more thoughts that would complicate things further so I will leave
them out unless this goes even further.
all the best,
On Sunday 14 January 2007 03:36 am, tomislav medak wrote:
> hi audun,
> i'm not sure this wouldn't create a whole range of other problems -
> delivering licensees to undue burdens imposed by authors and almost
> impossible enforceability the further we go downstream, both with the
> prospect of producing a chilling effect on reuse of works - and this
> runs contrary to what we want to achieve in the first place.
> Audun Myhra Bergwitz wrote:
> > Wouldn't one solve the problems with NC by rather having a commercial
> > license based on percentages? Ie something which says that you're free
> > to use this any way you like, but if you make any money by the use you
> > owe me X % of that in royalties (RY). Any percentage of 0 is 0, so then
> > non-commercial would be anything where there's royalties=0?
> > Audun Myhra Bergwitz
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
(da idea man)
National Novel Writing Month
Sayings (Winner 2006)
More information about the cc-licenses