[cc-community] Intellectual Highway Department
email at greglondon.com
Wed May 31 09:49:50 EDT 2006
> NC *is* a commons, or so CC would have us think.
if you can show me where CC uses the word "Commons"
to describe CC-NC, I will forward them my request
that they fix it.
> There is no point in it otherwise
> (ND would serve the same purpose).
Of course there is.
If an artist wants to give away free samples,
they need to use CC-NC.
If they give away free samples with CC-ND,
then I could take their song, upload it to
Lulu.com and sell CD's on demand.
NC prevents everyone else from SELLING the free sample.
>> No one should be doing anything "commons" like with anything licensed
>> CC-NC or CC-ND or any other market economy license.
> Nevertheless, people do exactly that.
> What do I tell them? "Naughty, naughty"?
> "What you're doing can't be done!"?
No, you tell them that whatever work they're adding
to the original will always be at a disadvantage
compared to the original artist. If they wish to
contribute anyway, that's their choice. Some people
like to write fan fiction, and most fanficcers do
NOT expect to ever get paid. It isn't right or wrong,
it's just that fanficcers know what they're getting
>> What's the problem is that you're relating to CC-NC as if it should
>> be a commons or it should put works into a commons area. It doesn't.
>> But then, it was never meant to do that.
> Repetitive, but simply wrong:
> It certainly /was/ meant to be a commons license, or there never
> would have been a CC-By-NC-SA license option. It's completely
> illogical from the perspective you describe -- yet, there it is:
> (From CC's current "meet the licenses" page).
> Sure sounds like a promise of commons-like viability to me.
I ***never*** read it that way. (six asterisks)
It allows fanfiction and other derivatives that
I think one of CC's first mottos was "spectrum of rights".
Only one end of the spectrum is a commons. the other end
is various stages of cathedral models.
> As you describe this business model, NC should be abolished, because
> it offers nothing you can't get with ND. NC is fairy gold entirely.
I don't have a problem with CC-NC not being a commons license.
Commons licenses are not the only way to solve a problem.
Cathedral licenses also solve various problems as well.
And some of CC's cathedral licenses allow poeple who want
to use cathedral approaches do so without signing up for
the DRM-DMCA gestapo clauses that they could use.
Cathedral licenses that are more liberal than simple
All Rights Reserved are a good thing.
> Those people should be using ND, then. That would make their
> no-commons intent clear.
But if they want to allow fanfiction and similar derivative
works, they just don't want anyone to charge money for it,
CC-NC is exactly what works.
> But you're wrong -- artists are in fact using NC in a false hope that the
> collaborative magic will help them. Creative Commons is contributing
> to this fallacy.
I'd have to say that this is the first time I've heard
anyone say they expected a collaborative, commons-like
project to spring forth from their CC-NC licensed work.
But I don't get out much.
> Artists using CC-By-NC-SA, in particular, are the ones I'm interested in,
> and they do exist. They are indeed fence-hangers on the NC/SA line,
> and I hate to say this, but I have both theoretical and empirical reasons
> to believe that as things stand, they mostly don't shift to the SA side,
> but to the NC side. So SA loses content it might otherwise get.
Way back when CC was first starting it's licenses,
I was adamant that ShareAlike not be combinable with
any other license, for the very reason that ShareAlike
implies a commons and NonCommercial is the antithesis
of a commons.
I don't have a problem with CC-NC but I do have a problem
with CC-NC-SA. If anyone is using CC-NC-SA, they may as
well switch to CC-NC because there is no share-aliking
that will occur on any "commons" sort of scale that would
need ShareAlike to protect it.
If you want to get rid of a license, get rid of that
combination that is CC-NC-SA.
Bounty Hunters: Metaphors for Fair IP laws
More information about the cc-community