[cc-licenses] Yet more on NC
Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts
cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org
Tue Oct 17 18:55:16 EDT 2006
>> Rename the licences to:
>> Then include a clause to the effect of "This material may not be sold,
>> transmitted, replicated, duplicated, or otherwise distributed in a
>> manner which cause a charge, whether direct, indirect, or associated
>> with the material, to the recipient of the material. All expenses in
>> distribution have to be born by the distributor, who may not receive any
>> compensation for the distribution."
> This is not what I want for my BY-Sa works at all. I want BY-SA(libre) and
> they can charge if the market will permit it.
That isn't for your CC-BY licence. It is to replace CC-NC licences.
I will grant that CC-BY-SA might get confused with gratis-BY-SA. But
with that clause, it should be pretty obvious to anybody that reads it,
that gratis-style licences mean that distribution will cost them money
that they won't be able to recoup.
> Unless I missed you meaning an you intend gratis to replace NC, which I now
> think you might.
I did. I didn't make that part clear.
> Now, I might like some tweaking as to what is considered "mere
aggregation" but that is a separate issue.
Is it just me, or is what constitutes "mere aggregation" raising its
head in a number of software projects (both open source, and closed source)?
More information about the cc-licenses