[cc-community] unglue.it to CC licenses (Was: Re: Rant about CC licenses)

Engel Nyst engel.nyst at gmail.com
Wed Dec 18 13:03:54 EST 2013


On 12/18/2013 05:10 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>>>> After {{ cc_date }}, this book shall be released under a {{
>>>> license }} license at which time the above restricted license
>>>> terms shall be replaced and superseded by the terms of the
>>>> applicable Creative Commons license {{license_url }}
>
> That leads to nightmares. You usually do not want to supercede but to
> add an additional licence. Otherwise it gets really *mindnumbingly*
> messy with copies made under the original licence and incorporated
> into some other work, or modified: the original licensor can't
> relicense the work of the other parties so what you may inadvertently
> do is make the derivatives completely defunct!
>

The original license was proprietary, and very restrictive, the
read-do-not-copy license in traditional publishing AFAICS.

unglue.it is a great initiative, and it's not clear to me why this
"superseding" wouldn't be ok. The analysis of consequences for copies or
derivatives doesn't seem to apply. Not saying it's clear it works,
either, just I don't see an obvious argument against. The intention here
seems to be to make it more reliable for the recipients (readers who
pledge). It's the content that is freed, content that may be in a copy
they already received...

Agree that all this can't be applied easily to the CC-X idea. They're
different.

-- 

~ "Excuse me, Professor Lessig, but may I ask you to sign this CLA, so 
that we have legally your permission to distribute your CC-licensed words?"


More information about the cc-community mailing list