Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Richard Cobbett" <charybdis AT deja-x.co.uk>]

"I'd say on the grand scheme of things that a fair-use license would
not cause any major changes in the way things are done. A fair-use
license won't fundamentally alter the way people create, distribute,
and listen to music, as far as I can figure."

It wouldn't - however there might be some semiotic value in pushing the
specific word 'fair'. After all, if that's fair to do, then by inference,
more restrictive licenses are deemed unfair. I agree that it's not
necessarily a license for CC to worry about (and yes, damn that's a lot of
licenses on the go right now...), just pointing out that all this doesn't
end with US territorial waters.

One slight bonus in this case is that this kind of license can be done as a
simple sticker deal rather than a pic-and-mix CC license, making it more
immediately memorable than, say,
NoAttrib-NonCommercial-NoAsshat-SomeDeriv-Lookjustlearnlegaltalk2.0 -
especially if the independent music (and other companies) could be persuaded
to use it as a badge on actual products as well as internet downloads -
rather like the FairTrade
(http://www.oxfamamerica.org/campaigncoffee/art3391.html) scheme that's
currently running over here.

__________________
Richard Cobbett | http://www.richardcobbett.co.uk

-----Original Message-----
From: cc-licenses-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:cc-licenses-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of
email AT greglondon.com
Sent: 24 March 2004 18:13
To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts
Subject: Re: License that allows private copying?


Richard Cobbett said:
> In the US, certainly, but over here in the UK we have absolutely no legal
> Fair Use rules, even over things like ripping a CD to listen to it on your
> MP3 player. Nobody actually gets sued over it, the shops sell MP3 players

Hm, didn't know that. I'm struggling just to grok US copyright law
and haven't even glanced at other countries yet.

I'd say on the grand scheme of things that a fair-use license would
not cause any major changes in the way things are done. A fair-use
license won't fundamentally alter the way people create, distribute,
and listen to music, as far as I can figure. If the UK suddenly
clamped down on private copying, then a fair-use license would
suddenly have a need, but as it is, its a formality, and formalities
don't alter the world.

Creative Commons may be willing to crunch out a license.
They are showing themselves to be more of a license mill for
any license, any right, any one, rather than being dedicated
to their namesake of creating a "commons" via licensing.

"some rights are better than no rights" seems to be their motto,
so what the heck, why not a fair use license. It's not confusing
enough that there are dozens of CC licenses covering the entire
spectrum from AllRightReserved to PublicDomain.

hm, well, beyond any other problems I mentioned thus far,
I also have issue with the name, since the fair use
license would reduce to the 2 letter acronym of ...

CC-FU

and, at least in america, "FU" has other connotations...

;)





_______________________________________________
cc-licenses mailing list
cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:2.1
N:Uk;Charybdis@Deja-X.;Co.
FN:charybdis AT deja-x.co.uk (charybdis AT deja-x.co.uk)
TITLE:Writer
URL;WORK:http://www.richardcobbett.co.uk
EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:charybdis AT deja-x.co.uk
REV:20040223T221114Z
END:VCARD