development of an education license or license option for Creative Commons

[Heather Ford <hford AT csli.stanford.edu>]

I don't see that anyone has actually responded to your attempts at 
compromise, David - I hope that they use this opportunity as you attempt to 
accommodate everyone. I like this draft. But I liked the other one better - 
especially because I wanted to see how the *larger* community would, in 
fact, use the license and how they would choose specific conditions 
(thereby relying on the community to decide the direction of development). 
I propose that if those opposed to your first draft (perhaps those people 
should identify themselves) are able to agree with your first draft, then I 
will be willing to initiate a research project to track the choices that 
people are making in terms of whether they're choosing formal or informal 
educational licensing - and will then report back to the community in a 
couple of months time.

This said, I am happy with the second draft - but for it's slightly blurry 
definition of who can use the license (which in effect means everyone) - 
can we perhaps say 'under the Education License, you require that 
learning-facilitators... ? if we're going to go with this? I understand 
that legal language is important here.

Heather.

At 09:48 PM 2/9/2004, you wrote:

> This draft removes the "educational institution option" but maintains the 
> language which makes it clear that the educational use license IS NOT JUST 
> FOR TEACHERS AND STUDENTS. This is basically the "open education license."
>
> <DRAFT 2>
>
> If you make your work available under the Education License, you require 
> that teachers, students, and others directly associated with a formal 
> educational institution, as well as mentors, tutors, self-learners, and 
> others who may not be directly associated with a formal educational 
> institution:
>
>  - Cite you as the source of the work,
>
>  - Make only noncommercial uses of your work which primarily and 
> purposively facilitate learning, and
>
>  - Distribute any modified versions of your work
>
>     + under this same license, and
>     + include in the distribution a copy of the original work which 
> allows users to determine what changes you made to the derived work 
> (inclusion by link / reference is sufficient)
>
> </DRAFT>
>
> This draft removes the option because, though a few people have 
> complimented efforts to harmonize the different viewpoints (thanks for the 
> encouragement!), I've yet to hear anyone argue intensely in its favor. If 
> you want choice back in the license, let's here it.
>
> D
> _______________________________________________
> cc-education mailing list
> cc-education AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-education

Heather Ford
************************************************
www.hblog.org
Reuters Stanford Digital Visions Program
http://reuters.stanford.edu
Cordura Hall, 220 Panama Street
Stanford, CA 94305-4115, USA
Cell: 650 380 4227