Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Evan Prodromou <evan AT wikitravel.org>]

>>>>> "GL" == Greg London <email AT greglondon.com> writes:

    GL> The 'Founders Copyright' does not make any sense to me at all.

I think the point is a commentary on the overextension of copyright in
e.g. the Sonny Bono* Copyright Extension Act.

    GL> So, I cannot see any incentive for Authors to use Founders
    GL> Copyright, either for Market or Gift Economies.Which might
    GL> explain why no one has used it.

Well, I dunno if that's why. I'm sure there have probably been at
least a few people who filled out the form on creativecommons.org. And
the original press release planned to have "hundreds" of titles under
the Founders'.

    http://creativecommons.org/press-releases/entry/3675

A large part of the O'Reilly catalog was supposed to go under the
Founders' at some unspecified future date:

    http://press.oreilly.com/pub/pr/1042

The big problem here is that the press releases went out before, it
seems, there was a mechanism in place to make the Founders' work. And
after the press releases, what was the point of following up?

On the plus side, O'Reilly _does_ have some Free books:

   http://www.oreilly.com/openbook/

...but none are actually under the Attribution license, as mentioned
in the release.

~ESP

* Requiem in pax.

-- 
Evan Prodromou <evan AT wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel - http://www.wikitravel.org/
The free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide