Use cases for NonCommercial license clause

Greg London email at
Thu Apr 21 16:48:01 EDT 2005

Legally, it might be possible to do this.

Realistically, what you've implemented is a commons
and the incentive will be for people to put their
name on the list of benificiaries even if they've
made the minorest of edits.

If the idea is to avoid paying downstream authors
altogether, but to guarantee that you can benefit
from their work commercially even though they
cannot, then you've created a nice little loophole
to your benefit and everyone else's detriment.
And that's not something I can support.

What you've trying to marry is the concept of
a gift economy and a compulsory license, and
it makes for an odd combination.

This is why I keep saying that NC-SA is a combination
that doesn't make sense. Trying to manage commercial
rights to a work that many people are going to contribute
to is really a matter for a contract between authors,
not a simple license from you to whatever downstream
author wants to create a derivative.

Managing a commons requires limiting who can enter
the commons and what share they get. Intellectual
ideas are abstract and do not suffer the problems
of a commons, but as soon as you start talking about
money, you're talking about a finite resource.

Bounty Hunters: Metaphors for Fair IP Law.

More information about the cc-licenses mailing list