development of an education license or license option for Creative Commons

[David Palmer <davidpalmer AT westnet.com.au>]

On 2003.09.15 23:20 David Wiley wrote:
> George Siemens wrote:
>
> > "What if we simply "rebranded" the 
> > Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license the "Educational Use 
> > license," got a different colored icon, and took advantage of the 
> > name and icon change to make marketing inroads with educators?"
> >
> > I like the idea. Marketing and awareness is the biggest challenge. I 
> > feel
> > the existing CC licenses cover the needs of most educators.
> I agree that marketing and awareness are the main challenges. I also 
> think its true that existing licenses cover the needs of most 
> educators. As I have read, reread, and pondered both the 
> conversations we've been having on the list and my own desires to 
> increase the amount of freely available educational materials, I've 
> tried to understand the best path forward for this project. The whole 
> goal is to increase the net amount of materials available for 
> educational use. This means we need to target the largest possible 
> group of people with this new license, if the assumption is true that 
> larger numbers of people using the license will mean larger amounts 
> of content made available.
>
> > Curious: David, obviously, this is a big change from the original 
> > proposal
> > (and I think a positive one)...but how does this relate to the posts 
> > you've
> > made previously about the needs of some educators, due to the nature 
> > of
> > their work, to be able to limit the license only for educational 
> > use. One of
> > the main premises of the original proposal was the exclusion of
> > non-education uses. Are you dropping that requirement? Intending to 
> > include
> > in the future? Or how is that need expressed in the "new" version? 
> > (I'm
> > assuming noncommercial still allows military use, as an example)
> I'm increasingly convinced by this conversation that the group of 
> educators who would be willing to use the By-NC-SA as-is, if only 
> they knew about it, is larger than the group who don't use it because 
> the license is not restrictive enough. (This may seem obvious when 
> stated this way, but is the kind of thing that becomes clearer 
> through conversation -- who says we don't have a process here?)  If 
> there is consensus around this conjecture, then our mission becomes 
> how to evangelize some configuration of the current CC to educators. 
> So, giving the "By-NC-SA" another, more marketable name, like the 
> "Education License," would be the first step toward reaching that 
> broader audience.
>
> "CC Education License" doesn't have to be the only name this 
> particular configuration has. Other projects might want to give the 
> By-NC-SA another label, and that would be just fine.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> D
Hello,

This post, I feel, is heading in a more productive direction.
From the perspective of someone who has been deeply involved in 
promotion/marketing, I think that it would possibly even pay to go one 
more step in what would appear to be retrograde, and precisely define 
your target market(s).
Then and, only then, are you in a position to tailor your product to 
address those markets.
This is 75% of your market acceptance factor.
It also helps in clarifying to whom it would be best to approach in 
your initial product/market introduction.
Regards,

David (Yes, another one).  
_______________________________________________
> cc-education mailing list
> cc-education AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-education