holtzermann17 at gmail.com
Wed Dec 14 18:22:11 EST 2011
>> It seems to
>> me that the CC-By-NC-SA license is a bit of an afterthought. The
>> technology (free videos) was the main idea. Does the license matter
>> at all in this case?
> In the case of NC, I'd say no.
OK, so that's the case of Khan Academy handled.
What about MIT-OCW? If there had never been a CC-By-NC-SA (or the
same by another name), would MIT-OCW have never have existed?
MIT-OCW came into existence in October of 2002, and the Creative
Commons licenses were released in December of the same year. Some
historian would have to dig deeper to say what was happening during
those three months.
Fast forward a decade, and "They are currently projected to run out of
financial reserves in FY2012 without additional sources of funding".
Interesting opportunity for an intervention. (MIT can't make money
off of their NC licensed materials -- and yet they will still insist
that others shouldn't either?)
> But I wouldn't lump the ND licenses along with that.
> I don't think we should engage in theft in order to benefit the commons.
Copyright infringement is not theft.
More information about the cc-community