[Cc-nz] Time to retire ND and NC

Danyl Strype strypey at disintermedia.net.nz
Thu Sep 20 04:14:45 EDT 2012


Kia ora koutou

Paul's question is an interesting one, with two parts:
1a) what CC licensed works originate in Aotearoa?
1b) what works use the CC ANZ localisations of the generic CC licenses?

Another set of related questions which interest me are:
2a) what CC ANZ-licensed works/ CC works generated in Aotearoa have
been re-used in a way that would not have been possible had they been
under ARR
2b) what CC ANZ-licensed works/ CC works generated in Aotearoa have
been re-used in a way that would not have been possible had they been
under NC or ND clauses

The first set of questions is a measure of uptake. The second set of
questions asks what benefit (if any) that uptake is having.

One example of 2b is the LINZ map data which was released under CC-BY,
and has been imported into OpenStreetMap.org (twice, thanks to the OSM
license change from CC-BY-SA to Open Data Commons License). NC/ND
clauses would have prevented this re-use.

The comments about "moralism" in relation to free culture seem to be
coming out of conversations I have not been part of. I certainly think
there is an ethical dimension to any discussion of copyright
restrictions. I think the onus is on those who support governmental
restrictions on the right to copy to erect an ethical defence of said
restructions. However, that's a far cry from making a moralistic claim
that ARR copyright is "evil", or that anybody who defends it is a "bad
person".

I don't think its untrue or unfair to point out that many of the
people who defend ARR copyright do so for bad reasons, ie reasons
which are based on vested interest and intellectual dishonesty (eg
misleading phrases like "intellectual property"), and if there are
"bad people" in the world, there certainly a lot of potential gains
for them in extending the scope, duration, and means of enforcement
available for ARR monopolies, and other private monopolies such as
patents. However, I would be the first to admit there are also good
reasons for people defending ARR copyright, even if I disagree with
them. The same applies to the defence of NC.

Am I correct that nobody so far has defended ND by offering a specific
case of its benefits? Could the benefits of offering a suite of
license options be retained if we retire ND, and keep some form of NC?

Hei kōnā
S


On 18 September 2012 10:45, Matt McGregor
<Matt.McGregor at royalsociety.org.nz> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Paul, sorry, didn't mean to dodge this; my earlier answer was meant to respond to both of your questions
>
>>> Do we know how many objects from New Zealand exist with any CC
>>> licences
>
> We don't have any reliable information on this. As you know, one of the great things about CC is that it's open, which means that users don't have to register before using a licence. This means that tracking licence use--and estimating the amount of licensed objects--can be a headache.
>
> CCHQ are working on their estimates for a global count at the moment, but that won't be finished for some time. I've no plans to do a NZ version of this at the moment.
>
> Cheers,
> Matt



-- 
Danyl Strype
Community Developer
Disintermedia.net.nz/strype

"Geeks are those who partake in our culture."
- .ISOcrates

"Uncomfortable alliances are not just necessary; they reflect and
speak to the tremendous possibility of our political moment."
- Harmony Goldberg and Joshua Kahn Russell
http://www.nationofchange.org/new-radical-alliances-new-era-1337004193

"Both Marxists and Chicago-school libertarian economists can agree
that free software is the best model."
- Keith C Curtis
http://keithcu.com/wordpress/?page_id=407


More information about the cc-nz mailing list