Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: Attribution Issue

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Glenn Otis Brown <glenn AT creativecommons.org>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: Attribution Issue
  • Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 13:15:02 -0700

I think this conversation may shed some light on why 97% of people avoided nonattribution. Please can this be taken into consideration for CC 3 or the re-introducti

if you don't want attribution, simply say so. the license provides for revoking the attribution requirement. or don't provide your name. read the actual text of the attribution clause.

On May 26, 2004, at 4:46 AM, Rob Myers wrote:

IANAL, TINLA, etc.

On Wednesday, May 26, 2004, at 12:04PM, Romain d'Alverny <aperio AT free.fr> wrote:

Le mer 26/05/2004 à 08:28, Rob Myers a écrit :
On 26 May 2004, at 02:24, Mike Linksvayer wrote:

If you want to disclaim ownership the public domain is for you, and is
a clear option via <http://creativecommons.org/license/>.

The public domain is not share-alike.

Sure, but how do you (practically) prevent a work, on which no one
reclaim ownership, from being used and not "shared-alike" ?

You don't. IMHO I believe you may have misunderstood what nonattribution means in the CC Licenses.

Not requiring attribution of something that you own is not the same as giving up ownership of it. Non-attribution is saying "I own this, I'll give you some restricted rights, but don't print my name on the cover". This is very different from making something public domain, which is saying "I don't own this, do what you want with it".

Any restriction comes only from a person having legitimate authority on
the work (the author).

Absolutely. This is how the CC licenses work.

If the author disclaim ownership, how, and why could he restrict uses of
such a work ?

This is not what nonattribution means. If the author dedicates their work to the public domain, they cannot restrict use. That is precisely why the public domain is not a substitute for nonattribution sharealike (and why the public domain has nothing to do with nonattribution in general).

I think this conversation may shed some light on why 97% of people avoided nonattribution. Please can this be taken into consideration for CC 3 or the re-introduction of ~BY . :-)

- Rob.

_______________________________________________
cc-licenses mailing list
cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page