[cc-community] Intellectual Highway Department

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Wed May 31 20:46:04 EDT 2006


On Wednesday 31 May 2006 07:44 pm, Greg London wrote:
> On 5/31/06, Terry Hancock <hancock at anansispaceworks.com> wrote:
> > But my point is this: CC is already eating lead over promoting NC
> > licenses to begin with.  Nevertheless, CC folks stubbornly support
> > NC because "it's the most popular license".
>
> I support the CC-NC license as a viable tool for cathedral projects.
> I don't care that the organization is called Creative Commons.
> The license works. It solves a problem. It isn't a "commons"
> problem, but to get upset because Creative Commons
> should only do "commons" license because of the word
> "commons" is in the name of the organization is like
> getting upset at General Electric because they went and
> built a jet engine and that has nothing to do with electricity.
>
> You've overextended yourself there.
> If you think CC's website needs more education/clarification,
> I might support that. But I'm not tied to the name so closely
> that CC must be a one-horse shop.
>
> > But look at the stats: NC-SA /is/ quite popular --
> >
> > 34.03% -- and THE SINGLE MOST POPULAR LICENSE.
> >
> > Obviously NC-SA is capturing some serious mindshare with artists.
> >
> > What do those people want?
>
> I don't know for sure. I think there are some who want to maintain
> controll of their work, but think putting a CC-NC-SA license on their
> work will somehow magically invoke the ShareAlike fairies to come
> and work on their stuff.
>
> But I also think there are some who wouldn't mind contributing
> their stuff under a straight CC-SA license, but simply can't
> figure out how to do that and still make some money doing it.
>
> And, like I keep saying, the license doesn't solve that problem.
> If the project is in rocky terrain, and they can't figure out how
> to make it work, they fall back to the license they figure is safe.
>
> That isn't CC's fault. That isn't the creator's fault.

Insofar as CC is unwilling to take the ethical stand that the FSF does, it may 
be. On the other hand. CC might have the better approach.

Insofar as the creator is unwilling to experiment with different licenses and 
business models, it may be. I will be the first to admit that I do not have 
any proven models with a history of success for most of these areas we are 
discussing. I am running experiments and seeding the commons though. I have a 
feeling that the accumulation of a large body of copyleft works may be all 
that is needed to level the terrain in many areas. There is no way to prove 
that until such a body of copyleft works are in existence though.

> It's simply the nature of the terrain. If you want
> to fix that, I suggest finding something that interests
> you, something that you know really well, figure
> out a way to make that space friendly
> to a bazaar model, figure out a way to make it
> chunkable, find a goal that is big enough to inspire
> but small enough to be realistic in some timeframe,
> come up with some short term milestones, and
> let 'er rip.
>
> If you solve the terrain problem, a simple copyleft
> license will suffice, and it will be easy and natural
> for people to contribute their time freely.
>
> > Can't we find a way to deliver what these artists want,
> > instead of a fake?
>
> If they want a commons project but aren't usign a commons license,
> it's probably because the project terrain hasn't been leveled yet.
> The license won't do that, but some tool or other capability might.
>
> floss encyclopedias had been tried before.
> I believe there was one that someone tried
> that required people submit their changes and
> then had to wait for those changes to get "approved"
> and it was all very rocky terrain.
>
> Then someone invented the wiki tool,
> and someone else figured it would be good for
> an encyclopedia, and pow.

Actually, I think it was the same people. Here is a wikipedia link on the 
matter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nupedia

I also think that this, again, may actually have been more a matter of 
philosophy instead of tools. That is, they had the tools but had a structure 
that did not take advantage of them.

Mind you, this does not work against your contention. By their rules, they 
were taking something inherently chunkable and making it artificially 
unchunkable.

I am still awaiting your input on which major free software projects are 
chunkable to the level you stipulate as being necessary for free art / 
content projects to succeed.
>
> the wiki was a tool that bulldozed a lot of
> previously rocky terrain to make it easy to
> contribute to text=based projects. Combine that
> with the natural chunkability of encyclopedia
> articles, and a bazaar solution becomes natural.
>
> What project, exactly, were you interested in
> creating?

I know that question was not directed at me but:

http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145

that is my page at ourmedia.org

and there you will find:

short howto videos on making paper planes of different designs,

some photos of various scenes,

two short stories, (?? are they long enough to be called that?)

and the first draft of my 2005 nanowrimo novel "Tings"

all released under a BY-SA license.

If I can ever get organized and on track again, I want to put up a lot more.

The site is a pain these days for speed, but there are supposed to be new 
servers due "soon."

I have made some other suggestions, but apparently they do not even excite 
enough interest to generate a comment. I must be more of an oddball than I 
imagine.

Oh, and I am working on some simple animated videos using ktoon as well. 
Coming soon to a theatre near you. [ ~;-) ]

Here is another idea that just came to me...

"Net Stars International"

What is Net Stars International you ask with great excitement and worms on 
your tongue?

It is a net based star search competition. Initially centered around music. 
All performances must be completely BY-SA licensed.

There is a ten dollar entry fee. You must create your own video of your 
performance (ogg-theora format) and send it in along with an ardour 
multitrack project file or if you cannot send in an ardour file, a separate 
uncompressed wav file of each track (or compressed with flac.)

What else do we need to do for something like that to have a chance of flying? 

Final winner gets a big chunk of the entrance fees. Winner also gets featured 
on the front page of _______ for a month. (Come on Google, step up to the 
plate and help out the commons with this. Would someplace else be better?)

all the best,

drew
-- 
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/145261
Record a song and you might win $1,000.00
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145




More information about the cc-community mailing list