[cc-licenses] New Generic and ports

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Sun Oct 8 17:56:51 EDT 2006


On Sunday 08 October 2006 05:36 pm, Rob Myers wrote:
> drew Roberts wrote:
> > 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.
>
> CC are working on an NC definition and I thought the initial version was
> very good. I've also had useful discussions with educational users of
> NC, and I personally think that it is possible for a state or nonprofit
> educational institution to make NC use of work.
>
> > [...]T his "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.
>
> Amen.
>
> Personally I would like to see NC and ND deprecated.
>
> > 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?)
>
> You can copy them over peer to peer networks. This is a net gain over
> how ARR is generally applied by the record companies.

I know that NC and ND are better overall that ARR, it is just that I don't 
think those improvements are improvements which positively impact a "creative 
commons"...
>
> > 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 useful?
>
> The problem is that if you look at CC usage, NC is the most popular
> license module.

So, I did not call for CC to drop NC and ND, even if I would like them to, I 
asked if they would adopt a Free CC option for those of us who are concerned 
with Free and who consider the NC and ND detrimental to our aims.

If they did this, the confusion where people are beginning to equate CC with 
CC * NC would not impact us as greatly, we could try and build up Free CC in 
its own right.
>
> There is also overwhelming backing for NC from Lessig, as putting a URL
> after NC works where you can buy an ARR license to the work solves the
> problem of people confusing libre and gratis by confusing them for them.
>
> - Rob.

all the best,

drew
-- 
(da idea man)
National Novel Writing Month
http://www.nanowrimo.org/index.php
Join me and write a novel in 30 days! Dont delay!



More information about the cc-licenses mailing list