Development of Creative Commons licenses

[email AT greglondon.com]

Sorry, that last post was WAY too long. 
Boiling it down here:

> If Creative Commons wants to cultivate a rich body of works
> that people can pool from, it should seriously consider 
> reducing the options to two licenses:
> 
> CC-BY-SA : attribution sharealike
> CC-BY-ND-NC : noderiviative noncommercial
> 
> The BY-ND-NC is for the people who are looking to get paid
> for their work, and want free distribution to get the
> word out.
> 
> The BY-SA is for people who want to contribute to the pool
> of works that other people can use. Commercial use is 
> allowed but since it is sharealike, any derived works
> whether commercial or education or whatever is still
> usable by the public pool.
>
> People are either willing to contribute their works to a 
> pool that other people can use freely or they're not.
> If they are, BY-SA will expand the pool. If they are not,
> use the BY-NC-ND license.
>
> A massive pool of music and movies and text that anyone can
> use and modify will only be achievable via BY-SA. All other
> options simply splinter the pool into incompatible little
> puddles.

Read my full post first if you disagree