[cc-licenses] Retiring standalone DevNations and one Sampling license

Terry Hancock hancock at anansispaceworks.com
Thu Jun 7 16:19:15 EDT 2007

drew Roberts wrote:
> On Thursday 07 June 2007 03:19 pm, Jonathon Blake wrote:
>>The brand "Creative Rights" would initially offer the following licenses:
>>* Creative Rights Attribution: CR-BY;
>>* Creative Rights Share Alike: CR-BY-SA;
>>* Creative Rights No Derivatives: CR-BY-ND;
>>* Creative Rights Sampling:  CR-SAMP;

This is a cool idea, by the way. I wonder if CC will seriously consider it?

>>The brand "Creative Commons" would offer the following licenses:
>>* Creative Commons Attribution:  CC-BY;
>>* Creative Commons Share Alike:  CC-BY-SA;

> Would CR-BY=CC-BY and CR-BY-SA=CC-BY-SA? (I figure yes from context, but just 
> checking.)

No, I think he means for all of the "Rights" licenses to include NC, so

(except of course that he wants to delete the licenses on the right side
from the list of license offered under the "Commons" brand).

I think it's a terrific idea. Although, leaving the "NC" in, might be
better -- as in "CR-NC-BY", for continuity reasons.

>>The brand "Artistic Rights" would offer:
>>* Artistic Rights Attribution:  AR-ND
>>(This is the 'new' CC-BY-ND license);
>>*  Other licenses that do not conform to the four freedoms, and do not
>>have commercial limitations would fall into the "Artistic Rights"

I dislike the name, but otherwise it's okay. Maybe "Authors Rights" or
"Artists Rights" would be more appropriate, emphasizing the retention of
rights. Or how about "Creative Control"? :-)

>>I think that a DevNations style clause, in the existing NC license is
>>a bad idea. 
> Right, and so do I. I especially can't see at this point how it could be 
> better that DevNations.

I guess, being a relatively poor person in a rich nation, I'm pretty
biased against the whole concept of a "developing nation" license or clause.

I mean, it's not the nation that you're licensing stuff to, it's people.
And poor people live in a lot of countries, both rich and poor. So, if
you're doing it out of some bleeding-heart desire to help "all those
poor people over there", it might be a lot better to pick a license that
helps "poor people right here" as well. The whole concept just seems
very biased and unfair to me.

IMHO, there have to be better ways to achieve the same ends.


Terry Hancock (hancock at AnansiSpaceworks.com)
Anansi Spaceworks http://www.AnansiSpaceworks.com

More information about the cc-licenses mailing list