[cc-licenses] Time limited CC licenses for version 4.0 ?
email at greglondon.com
Thu Dec 22 08:27:27 EST 2011
> does sound familiar
Several years ago I suggested the idea of having a license that allowed
copyright holders to specify a shorter copyright term, after which point the
work was released to the public without any restriction at all.
So CC-BY-NC-ND-EXP2040 would be by-nc-nd until 2040 after which point the
author would release the work into the public domain.
That was something I suggested a number of years ago and CC pretty much just
flat out rejected.
I dont know if that suggestion way back when is ringing some memory bells
for you now. Perhaps.
I still consider the idea of having a way to let owners to easily release a
work into the public domain after a period of time, and do so easily within
the CC framework to be useful to some owners, and possibly useful to people
battling the continual extending of copyright terms just before they are
about to expire, because it makes more people that copyright terms arent
written in stone but are rather a negotiation between the public as a whole
and authors which is negotiated by the government. Or at least that was the
idea the founding fathers had.
I believe I mentioned this in one of my copyright books, either "Bounty
Hunters" or "Libre Labyrinth". I know for certain I suggested to CC offering
a licence that allowed the owner to indicate the work eould enter the Public
Domain at some time earlier than copyright terms would do it. And IIRC, CC
pretty much made one comment that they were going to ignore it.
Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless
From: Valentin Villenave <valentin at villenave.net>
To: Development of Creative Commons licenses <cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Thu, Dec 22, 2011 00:43:56 GMT+00:00
Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Time limited CC licenses for version 4.0?
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 1:28 AM, Mike Linksvayer <ml at creativecommons.org>
> In sum, I find the idea interesting in theory, I'd guess there's a
> high hurdle for demonstrating that it would likely be beneficial
> enough to include in 4.0, and welcome attempts to do so. The most
> convincing attempt would be to immediately get some major NC <= 3.0
> licensors to make independent commitments to dropping NC after some
> short number of years. :)
As someone who's been using -NC in the past and is now in the middle
of relicensing everything under BY-SA or FAL, I have to say this line
of thought does sound familiar. I think Gregor's idea is bold and
interesting, and certainly deserves to be carefully considered (it
somehow meets the rationale I once suggested to rms, which he
mentioned at the end of
List info and archives at
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses
In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cc-licenses