Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Mike Linksvayer <ml AT creativecommons.org>]

Chuck Peters wrote:
> We certainly need to be clear about it on the uncompressed portion of the
> CD.  Perhaps just explaining it in the human-readable summary is enough.
> But then that brings up the question of a slighly modified version of
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd-nc/1.0/ included on the CD still
> the same license, is it still ok to call it the Creative Commons License?

Didn't see this question at first.

If you're planning to modify the legal code (i.e., create a new license) 
you can't call it a Creative Commons license.

If you're planning to include a web page derived from the deed, but 
still use the exact license, you can call the license a Creative Commons 
license, as you would actually be using a CC license.  You might be very 
careful that your page accurately reflects what is in the license -- it 
would be misleading to say "this license only allows distribution in 
CD-ROM form".  And you might provide a link to the license deed at 
creativecommons.org.

IANAL, etc.

--
  Mike Linksvayer
  http://creativecommons.org/learn/aboutus/people#21