[cc-licenses] Time limited CC licenses for version 4.0?

Gregor Hagedorn g.m.hagedorn at gmail.com
Fri Dec 23 03:22:25 EST 2011


> I do realize a key aspect of Gregor's proposal is that expiry be built
> in [...] Maybe such should've
> been built into CC licenses from the beginning, but I'm less sure
> about the case for adding it now without a clear demonstration of
> demand and theory as to why it would be a net benefit. I'd love to be
> convinced (hopefully an indicator that others would be too).
>

I think CC is shaping realities with the license chooser. Few people ever
look at more. In fact, the CC website has no other good overview...

(Related: the founders copyright is not a good argument, in part because it
was never in the license chooser. I also personally view the name as
US-legal profession insider knowledge - I think normal people would
identify "founders" with the founders of Creative Commons and wonder why
they have a special copyright-licensing mode...)

However, the essence of my proposal is the thought of how to make the
standard closed-content NC licenses in the CC 3.0 suite less dangerous.
They are by far the most frequently used licenses. One could say, that CC
is promoting closed content. So, my thinking is about phasing out CC BY-NC,
CC BY-NC-SA, CC BY-NC-ND, to be _replaced_ by CC BY-NC(exp2013)-SA, ... CC
BY-NC(exp2036)-SA  alone.

This would limit the duration of closed content promoted by CC, It would
also contribute to the understanding that NC is not so desirable (many
people I had interviewed believe NC is MORE desirable than without, some
assuming "Wikipedia is using it of course"...) -- if the NC license is
deemed to require time limitation, it points to a problem.

Gregor
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/attachments/20111223/8153594e/attachment.html 


More information about the cc-licenses mailing list