[cc-licenses] Simplifying Licenses
bignose+hates-spam at benfinney.id.au
Wed Mar 4 00:35:22 EST 2009
Arthit Suriyawongkul <arthit at gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 10:12 AM, ⸘Ŭalabio‽ <Walabio at macosx.com> wrote:
> > CC-BY-SA is the GoldStandard of licenses. In a perfect world,
> > everything would be CC-BY-SA
> > CC-BY-NC-SA is the necessary evil. We should discourage it but allow
> > it.
> From the consumer point of view, I myself see little difference
> between by-sa and by-nc-sa, as even by-sa doesn't restrict the
> commercialization, the sa condition provide an alternative to the
> commercial anyway.
The mistake in this perspective is that the true “consumer” doesn't
really exist. People are using copyrighted material in all sorts of
commercial contexts: wait-staff playing some music at a restaurant, a
company employee pasting some images in a report, a movie clip being
played in a training seminar, etc.
These people don't *think* of themselves as requiring license to use
the work commercially, and they're not going to seek out such a
license; but of course they do require it.
Putting an NC clause on a work is restricting the freedom of these
people, with no real benefit to the copyright holder since they're
never going to see money for those uses anyway.
\ “[Entrenched media corporations will] maintain the status quo, |
`\ or die trying. Either is better than actually WORKING for a |
_o__) living.” —ringsnake.livejournal.com, 2007-11-12 |
More information about the cc-licenses