[cc-community] NC/ND

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Thu Dec 15 08:20:57 EST 2011

On Wednesday 14 December 2011 18:22:11 Joe Corneli wrote:
> >> 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.
> OK.
> > I don't think we should engage in theft in order to benefit the commons.
> Copyright infringement is not theft.

No, but you can go to jail for it and be impoverished by it if convicted. It 
is one thing to take that risk upon yourself. Another to put it on others. 
(Not familiar with the details of the instance being discussed though.)

all the best,


More information about the cc-community mailing list