Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Greg London" <email AT greglondon.com>]

IANAL

My take on non-commercial-use is that the
work itself is Distributed at no cost to the
recipient.

a) advertising,OK, since the work is free
b) subscription is Commercial
c) wide subscription is still commercial
d) $2 is commercial
e) No problems

side notes:

d) "$2 for my time and material costs"
businesses have to charge enough to
cover their time and material costs too.
iTunes sells a song for a buck.
exactly how are you distinguishing your
$2 from Apple's 99 cents?

d) "much like Linux is sold"
Linux allows Commecial Distribution,
so Linux does not have a problem with RedHat.
CC-NonCommercial explicitely forbids
RedHat-like operations.

e) "any problem with ME selling it"
as long as you are the sole copyright holder,
(meaning you dont mix in any contributions from
anyone else), you can license it anyway you wish.
This includes DUAL licensing or even MULTI
licensing.

The CC-FreeAdvertising licensing approach is
specifically designed to allow NonCommercial
copying and distribution to get your work
noticed and then allow you to relicense the
work to Sony for a bajillion dollars when
they come knocking on your door.




brad taylor said:
> I found this older message and am looking for some clarification on
> these topics as well. Any help would be appreciated.
> ------------
>     I am interested in creative commons licenses, but I
> have a few questions concerning the definition of
> non-commercial use? Here are a few examples that are
> unclear to me (assume all music files are covered
> under a non-commercial CC license)
>
> a.) A website distributes many music files, which is
> the main focus to the site. The site makes money on
> advertising.
>
> b.) A website distributes many music files, which is
> the main focus to the site. The site is subscription
> only.
>
> b.) A website distributes many music files, which is
> only one part of the site (it also offers, news,
> e-mail, I don't know, whatever). The site is
> subscription only.
>
> d.) I burn a CD full of music files and ask for $2 for
> my time and material costs. (much like selling a copy
> of Linux)
>
> e.) If I make the a song, and distribute it, and
> license it under the CC non-commercial, would there be
> any problem with ME selling it as I see fit?
> Understanding that other people could legally give it
> away?