[cc-community] [cc-licenses] Rant about CC licenses

Diane Peters diane at creativecommons.org
Mon Dec 16 08:36:45 EST 2013


Hi everyone,

I moderated these latest posts through, but I'll ask again that this topic
be pursued on the cc-community list. Among other reasons, most all on this
list are members there but you will receive broader community based
responses there.  Forwarding this along now.

Thanks,
Diane


On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 5:14 AM, David <aristegui at nodo50.org> wrote:

> "Definitely agreed here. I think what is broken is that copyright
> mistakenly attempts to treat ideas as property".
>
> Ideas or the expression of these ideas?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea%E2%80%93expression_divide
>
> Best regards,
> David.
>
> > Mitar <mmitar at gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> I think we are all agree that CC licenses are a hack, a patch to the
> >> broken copyright system.
> >
> > Definitely agreed here. I think what is broken is that copyright
> > mistakenly attempts to treat ideas as property.
> >
> >> CC licenses provide a range of choices for the users. Users can decide
> >> to allow this or that, but the main issue of copyright they do not
> >> address: the length of the copyright before it enters the public
> >> domain. Isn't this the main issue we have about current copyright? Not
> >> that copyright exists and what it protects, but that the protection
> >> time is getting longer and longer.
> >
> > That is a terrible result of the copyright system, yes. But it's an
> > outcome of the main complaint: the system attempts to grant
> > property-like monopolies over ideas.
> >
> >> And CC licenses do not address this at all. They play with some small
> >> permissions, sharing, remixing, just toys. But not with the real
> >> thing: when does work enter public domain.
> >
> > The granting of rights which are by default restricted under copyright
> > *does* address the real thing: it grants, immediately, the permissions
> > rather than waiting for some term of monopoly to expire.
> >
> >> But the main point is that after those X years, there is no "oh, I
> >> want a few years more, my work is more successfully than I anticipated
> >> and I am rich now", you licensed it, it is public domain. Yes!
> >
> > Why? If the work's recipients deserve the rights, then why not
> > immediately? I see your formulation as the one tweaking at the edges
> > instead of addressing the core issue.
> >
> >> This could also be mixed with other licenses, if you want. CC-BY-SA-5,
> >> means for 5 years it is CC-BY-SA, but then it goes into public domain,
> >> into CC-0. So every year, it gets one number less, countdown:
> >> CC-BY-SA-4, CC-BY-SA-3, CC-BY-SA-2, CC-BY-SA-1, CC-0. Happy new year!
> >> We have more CC works entering public domain. Isn't this the best
> >> present ever?
> >
> > I think you over-estimate the power of CC-0. It can only do what
> > copyright law allows a copyright holder to do; it is not at all clear
> > that copyright holders can defy the term of monopoly and simply declare
> > a work in the public domain before the expiration of that term.
> >
> > So no, I don't think creating more licenses is the solution, even if
> > this were a problem worth addressing. To the extent this is a problem,
> > it is solved only by reducing the term of copyright in law.
> >
> > --
> >  \        ?If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you |
> >   `\     have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither |
> > _o__)                       on your side, pound the table.? ?anonymous |
> > Ben Finney
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > List info and archives at
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
> > Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses
> >
> > In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
> > in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
> > process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List info and archives at
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
> Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses
>
> In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
> in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
> process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
>



-- 
Diane M. Peters, CC General Counsel
http://creativecommons.org/staff#dianepeters
diane at creativecommons.org <email%3Adiane at creativecommons.org>
______________________________________

Please note: the contents of this email are not intended to be legal
advice nor should they be relied upon as, or represented to be legal
advice.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-community/attachments/20131216/a0816050/attachment.html 


More information about the cc-community mailing list