Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] Granularity on non-commercial restrictions

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Stefan Tiedje <Stefan-Tiedje AT addcom.de>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Granularity on non-commercial restrictions
  • Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 22:15:18 +0100

drew Roberts wrote:
Yes, but since NC is not clearly defined, someone with tendencies like mine is going to be leery of playing with them at all. Especially where certain copyright violations can carry jail time.

This is exactly aimed at the need of clarification. The commercial use should be easy understandable and clear with no risk of going to jail or paying any unfair punishments. The only risk I could imagine of is something like making public what you paid and saying thank you.
If Micro$oft would use my music lets say for an advertisement and pay me only one dollar, you'd be sure the world will know, but I wouldn't sue them, and I can't because the user decides whats appropriate. Only if there is no compensation at all for "Fair Compensation Required" this would be possible.

Thats why I wanted to simplify it with a common definition of "fair
compensation" and two ways to ask for it either "required" or only
"encouraged".


So, BY-SA-FCR or BY-SA-FCE or BY-SA? Is this what you would envision in the BY-SA area?

almost, it would be either BY-SA-FCE (Fair Compensation Encouraged) or BY-SA-NC-FCR (Fair Compensation Required) where it means the commercial use requires a compensation, but the user will determine the amount, which will be accepted in any case. The latter would not need a change in the BY-SA-NC license, because the FCR would only cover the commercial use. It could then be redistributed either just with BY-SA-NC or again BY-SA-NC-FCR The FCR would add some freedom, as its possible to use it commercially under hopefully easy to understand circumstances.

I am certainly not against the compensation of the creators though. So long as it does not gum up the works.

In the world of art, you either like the work or you don't. In that regard artists are much more powerful than programmers.
You could always recreate a program from scratch and deliver it with what ever license you prefer.
But if I feel the need to create a derivative work from a music I love, there is now other way than respecting the will of the creator...

This won't influence the distribution of a work. I guess most of the music you listen to is standard copyrighted music, but if you love it and want to listen to it, you'd have to buy (or steal) it somehow. There is no alternative.

As a creator of art, you might actually want to gum up your work a bit, to prevent dilletants from destroying the original idea. I do like to give my work away, but I also want to be sure its treated respectful.

Stefan

--

[][] [][][] [][] [][][] [][] [][][] [][] [][][]
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]

Stefan Tiedje
Klanggestalter
Electronic Composition
&
Improvisation

/~~~~~\
\\\ /|() ()|\
))))) )| | |( \\\
/// \ \_/)/ )))))
\___/ ///

-------------------------x---
--_____-----------|----------
--(_|_ ----|\-----|-----()---
-- _|_)----|-----()----------
----------()------------x----

14, Av. Pr. Franklin Roosevelt, 94320 Thiais, France
Phone at CCMIX +33-1-49 77 51 72




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page