[cc-licenses] Alex Bosworth: "Creative Commons Is Broken"

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Thu Mar 9 07:58:13 EST 2006


On Thursday 09 March 2006 04:57 am, Rob Myers wrote:
> On 8 Mar 2006, at 22:27, drew Roberts wrote:
> > So, I could have a competing furniture store do the hosting.
>
> Would you be doing this to promote the NC work or to benefit the
> competing store financially?

This all came to mind because I like to promote Free Software, particularly 
GPL software and the Creative Commons, particularly BY-SA works.

I would do it to promote the works, I would probably have to go hat in hand 
and ask favours to get the stores to do it. (I could not be sure that the 
stores management would not see a benefit in it for themselves though, I do 
not hold out claims to actually reading minds.)
>
> > And a friend of
> > mine could have my family's store do the hosting.
>
> Would anyone benefit financially? If it's just a fig leaf over you
> wanting to do the hosting, it would infringe. If the friend wants to
> promote NC, it wouldn't.
>
> > But we better not collude.
>
> " " " :-)
>
> > It is just too complex. How is this ever gonna get easy to understand?
>
> By asking whether you are using the work for your own commercial ends.

If it were that simple, that would be cool. If all I had to do was examine my 
heart, give a simple yes or no answer to the best of my abilities and 
everyone including the copyright owners were bound to accept my answer, that 
would be a breeze.

You and I and everyone else knows that this determination of what is in my 
heart and mind is going to be made by someone else who is also not a mind 
reader.
>
> People can make money off NC. Kinkos will make a killing, as will
> ISPs. 

OK, what about Kinkos shareholders, do they have to go to competing copyshops 
where they don't hold shares to get their copies made?

> Apple can plead that iPods can be used with NC content, and so 
> should not be made illegal as copyright infringement machines. But
> they have not asked to make money off NC work, they are providing a
> service to people to use the NC work. The people actually using the
> work, that is the people experiencing the work or distributing the
> work or requiring that the work be copied, are not making money.
>
> So in the shop scenario Mia mentions, you are effectively hiring the
> shop's facilities to use to distribute NC work. So you are not
> infringing, and the shop is not infringing, it is incidental and has
> no direct benefit regarding NC work. But if I use NC work in my own
> shop to promote the shop or to sell as the shop's sole business, I am
> directly using the work for financial ends, and so I am infringing.
>
> (If I get NC work copied, I am causing money to be made off NC work.
> But I am not myself making money off NC work.)
>
> Some interesting scenarios:
>
> Imagine if Kinkos, Apple, or Napster said they would *only* handle NC
> work. Their business then looks like it is based on NC content,
> although they can argue that they are only providing a service to NC
> users. I think this is a case that, if it ever happens, should be
> tackled when it actually comes up as in abstract it's a bit of a
> black hole. :-)
>
> A copy shop might say "NC work has a ten dollar surcharge" to cover
> any legal risk over copying mis-licensed work.
>
> A web site uses the tip jar exception. If I don't click on the tip
> jar and try to download the work, I am redirected to another begging
> page. This goes on ten times until I can finally download the work.
> When challenged, the web site points to the tip jar exception and
> points out that people do not, finally, have to click on the tip jar
> link. They are just encouraging people to do so.
>
> > That is my solution for all uses. I am not gonna touch NC works.
> > Here is the
> > problem. Do all of you NC releasing people realise that many would
> > want to
> > promote your works but find it too dangerous to do so? Just so that
> > is clear.
>
> The problem is that NC is the license term that CC promote the most,
> and many people use it. Those people need (and deserve) clear
> guidelines.

Oh, I agree with the need for those guidelines bigtime and until things are 
clear to me I am not gonna devote my time to promoting those creators who use 
the NC options. The risk is too great and the reward is miniscule. If I like 
your BY or BY-SA works, you can expect me to spread the word about you. (I 
would appreciate it if you would return the favour.) Right now, those of you 
choosing the NC option can hire me to promote your works in the Bahamas if 
you like. ~;-) Fair is fair right?

What I don't agree with is that CC should promote NC the most if that is 
indeed the case. As opposed to that being the option most chosen.
>
> - Rob.

all the best,

drew
-- 
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/145261
Record a song and you might win $1,000.00
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145



More information about the cc-licenses mailing list