[cc-licenses] Founders as a module? was Re: Getting to Version 3.0
Dougpol1 at adelphia.net
Wed May 24 19:15:44 EDT 2006
Here is a little something from a different perspective as regards CC.
Last year I made up an hour long DVD of living aboard a sailboat in
FortLauderdale and sailing to the Bahamas spending the winter doing all the
things you do on a trip like that and returning To Fort Lauderdale. I didn't
have all the photos I needed and I added music. I didn't worry about
copyright as I was going to give copy's to my kids and no one else..
Everyone including friends that I showed it too really liked it.
I thought I might remove all the copywrited stuff add CC music and
pictures and put it on line free under CC. I am finding it almost
impossible to find stuff that I can use because so many pictures film clips
and music have different conditions for use. I also have not been able to
figure out if it's ok to give credit on a separate page at the end of the
cd. I am beginning to think that CC is not practical for use in something
like I am trying to do. Seems like there should be a different search engine
for each different type of license. If not yet down the road someplace.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Hancock" <hancock at anansispaceworks.com>
To: "Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts"
<cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 5:53 PM
Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Founders as a module? was Re: Getting to Version
> Greg London wrote:
>> Founders's isn't being adopted in any significant numbers. I think
>> any sort of term-limit-non-commercial license would fare even worse.
> I don't think the term-limit principle is the reason for the failure of
> I think the reasons are:
> 1) It's not a license at all, but a copyright purchasing contract
> 2) It's too complicated, and easy to misunderstand.
> 3) It requires agent-level trust in the Creative Commons organization.
> 4) It requires an exchange of money -- transactional cost.
> 5) It is fundamentally incompatible with the other CC license modules.
> 6) It is not marketed in any appealing way.
> As such, it is wide-open to FUD, and it's not a big surprise to me that it
> failed so badly. Ultimately, it failed because it *isn't* a license
> Or so it would seem to me.
> Terry Hancock (hancock at AnansiSpaceworks.com)
> Anansi Spaceworks http://www.AnansiSpaceworks.com
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org
More information about the cc-licenses