[cc-licenses] 4.0 NonCommercial

Kerrick Long me at kerricklong.com
Fri Jan 13 22:37:15 EST 2012


I agree with Greg. Is it not better to have people use CC-NC (and a
potential CC-NP) rather than keep a strict copyright and reserve all
rights? The plain truth is that not everybody is willing to make creative
work and give it away for commercial purposes, because they simply cannot
afford to. The good news is many of those people want to be able to let
others use their work for personal/private uses, so shouldn't CC try to
enable them to share their work as much as they are willing? A conservative
NC license would bring more content creators into the world of CC (possibly
to give more rights later), and a liberal license would make those already
in the world of CC happy. That's the main reason I propose having a
conservative and a liberal non-commercial-type license.

Thanks,
Kerrick Long
http://kerricklong.com/



On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Greg London <email at greglondon.com> wrote:

> Creative Commons, despite having "commons" in its name, is not entirely
> devoted to licensing what would be called "Free" phenomenom.  The sooner
> you integrate this into your thought process, the less aggravating life
> will be.
>
> non-commercial and no-derivatives are both clauses that do not qualify as
> "Free".  They are also two of CC's more popular licenses.  They are geared
> towards individual creators leveraging copyright law and the CC licenses to
> try and generate advertising about content through free (free as in beer)
> samples of the work.
>
> I dont have a problem with authors using All Rights Reserved or non-free
> licenses for their works. But it helps to understand that CC is not
> exclusively about only Free licenses.
>
>
> *Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless*
>
>
> -----Original message-----
>
> *From: *jmp <m.pedersen at lancaster.ac.uk>*
> To: *cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org*
> Sent: *Fri, Jan 13, 2012 17:21:22 GMT+00:00
> *
> Subject: *Re: [cc-licenses] 4.0 NonCommercial
>
>
>
> On 13/01/12 02:47, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Gregor Hagedorn **
> > writes:
> >
> >> A non-profit license would be nice, but a serious question: Can anyone
> >> come up with a globally applicable definition of non-profit?
> >
> > I have another serious question: Why is a non-profit license nice? It's
> > not obvious to me, and it doesn't fit with the ideals of free culture as
> > I understand them.
> >
> > Why should it matter whether culture, freely shared to all recipients
> > under non-discriminatory terms and permitting further sharing the same
> > way, is making a profit? That strikes me as something to be celebrated,
> > rather than denied through a license clause.
>
> Because the *particular* nature of profit making in this context (the
> world in which we live) is a function of an economic philosophy of
> continuous expansion, which treats (natural) resources as inifinite.
> Some people have discovered that this is in fact not the case - the
> world is finite and the natural resources are running out - and
> therefore these people are building movements and trying to find ways to
> reverse this destructive economy. Not making profit is seen as one way
> of doing this.
>
> m
>
>
> --
> http://commoning.wordpress.com
>
> "...I thought we were an autonomous collective..."
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120113/53a77090/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the cc-licenses mailing list