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

Greg London email at greglondon.com
Fri Dec 23 13:29:39 EST 2011


An "early release" license makes sense for a work that starts out  
noncommercial and/or noderivative and after some number of years becomes  
CC-BY or public domain.

There is no "commons" in NC or ND.  so an early release license would not  
take anything away from any commons, but would allow creators to commit to  
some shorter time frame where it WILL enter the commons via CC-BY.

Works that tend to have many many derivatives can keep all those derivatives  
in the commons with ShareAlike. But works that tend not to have lots of  
derivatives can see little functional difference between SA and something  
like CC-BY. 

CC-BY is still a *contribution* to the commons. It simply allows derivatives  
to ne taken out of the commons.  But the original remains.

Which is where something like an early release license would *contribute* to  
a commons by allowing creators to release the work to CC-BY after some  
number of years.

It is most specifically for people who want their work to be noncommercial  
and/or noderiv, but would ne willing to commit to releasing it to CC-BY  
after some number of years.  Without the early release, it will most likely  
remain NC ND.

Greg

Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless

-----Original message-----
From: Rob Myers <rob at robmyers.org>
To: cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Fri, Dec 23, 2011 18:07:58 GMT+00:00
Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Time limited CC licenses for version 4.0?

On 23/12/11 07:34, Javier Candeira wrote:
> 
> I can publish my work with a note that says: "if you receive this work
> before date X, it's cc-by-nc, and if it's after date X, it's
> cc-by-sa". We don't need new licenses. At most, we need new deeds, if
> at all.

We also don't need to gift a future CC with a moral panic when
everyone's CC+7 (or whatever) works are about to enter the public domain.

Founders' Copyright may not have seen mass adoption but it was certainly
promoted and some of CC's critics (honestly or not) confused it with
CC's main licences.

The market has already rejected this idea IMO, and it doesn't build a
commons *now*.

- Rob.
_______________________________________________
List info and archives at  
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
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
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/attachments/20111223/b9a68b68/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the cc-licenses mailing list