[cc-licenses] New Generic and ports

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Sun Oct 8 09:03:01 EDT 2006

On Sunday 08 October 2006 04:28 am, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> On Oct 8, 2006, at 08:24, jonathon wrote:
> > Since I expect the most significant dispute to be over the meaning of
> > "Non Commercial",
> FWIW, I think NC is a major bug in CC. First, I think it is
> irresponsible to offer a license whose meaning is unclear even to the
> CC folks themselves. Second, CC creates a brand image that CC equals
> Free Culture which is even stated to be inspired by Free Software,
> but NC is not Free as in Free Software. (CC also talks about Open
> Music when referring to Magnatune, but Magnatune's music is not Open
> as in Open Source.)

This "mislableing" problem is cropping up all the time.
> Now the Free as in Free Software type of Free Culture loses works to
> NC, because having NC available makes authors choose it by knee-jerk
> reaction. If NC wasn't available, to associate oneself with the brand
> of Free Culture, one would actually have to make the works Free as in
> Free Software.

As big a bug as NC is, I think ND is a bigger one. Exactly what, from a 
creative comons point of view, can one do with an ND work that you can't do 
with an all rights reserved work. (I am not saying that I don't prefer ND 
works or even NC-ND works to "ARR" works, just asking what commons benefit 
they give?)

Would CC be willing to consider a "Free CC" logo / brand / subsection that 
those of us concerned with "Free Culture" ... can associate under and 
promote? Do others concerned with "Free" think this is wise or would be 

> Henri Sivonen

all the best,

(da idea man)
National Novel Writing Month
Join me and write a novel in 30 days! Dont delay!

More information about the cc-licenses mailing list