[cc-licenses] New Generic and ports
rob at robmyers.org
Mon Oct 9 16:15:40 EDT 2006
Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts wrote:
> The issue with the By-SA licence in this situation, is that the
> organization is literally cutting off their oxygen supply. If they
> wanted to do that, they would simply use the Public Domain Licence.
In terms of cross-licensing, translation, and quoting < 1001 verses,
BY-SA is not cutting off the oxygen supply, it is ensuring that the air
circulates around the room.
It doesn't guarantee royalties, but nor does NC.
NC doesn't ensure that you make money from your work, it simply prevents
other people from doing so. Unless they are providing services or
equipment used to distribute your work (iPods, photocopiers or internet
services). It also works against you making money from end users of your
own work, as you have already released your own work for free.
With BY-SA you can at least exploit downstream derivative work. This may
be more protection than NC-SA, as people will understand that they have
to give back.
But neither license is a good fit for a borderline viable royalty-based
business. The business would need to switch to a different revenue model.
More information about the cc-licenses