[cc-community] NC/ND

cc at phizz.demon.co.uk cc at phizz.demon.co.uk
Tue Dec 13 20:52:02 EST 2011


On 13/12/2011 23:25, Mike Linksvayer wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:10 PM,<cc at phizz.demon.co.uk>  wrote:
>> On 13/12/2011 11:39, Joe Corneli wrote:
>>> It's all fine and good that institutions like MIT use CC-NC-SA -- I
>>> mean, it's there prerogative, right, if they want to "share" things
>>> that other people can't actually "use" (apparently without a second
>>> thought) -- but can't Creative Commons do something to discourage
>>> other organizations and individuals from using these licenses in the
>>> future?
>>
>> Why so?
>
> This deserves a longer response, but in brief:
>
> (1) Allowing commercial use unlocks a lot more social benefit
> (2) Lots of publicly funded and otherwise intended for public benefit
> projects use NC
> (3) Lots of not particularly publicly interested projects use NC, but
> don't actually have any copyright-based revenue stream to protect
> (4) Beyond the over-use of NC (and under-use of fully open licenses)
> implied by 1-3, NC further restricts the overall value of the commons
> because it is fundamentally not compatible with fully open licenses,
> meaning the commons is more fractured, smaller, and less impactful
> than it could be
>

That is solely the problem of the 'open licenses'. It seems to me that 
some are quite capable of mashing up NC licenses without any problems to 
create a comprehensive educational resource:


http://eol.org/pages/207831/details
http://eol.org/pages/207831/maps
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=2295&speccode=1832


without requiring a commercial license.




More information about the cc-community mailing list