Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Rob Myers <robmyers AT mac.com>]

On Wednesday, May 26, 2004, at 08:00AM, Evan Prodromou <evan AT wikitravel.org> 
wrote:

>Anyways, I think Attribution is probably more analogous to the
>copyright clause in the license, which doesn't seem to get anybody up
>in arms.

BSD attribution is a pain to manage and difficult to keep track of. It is an 
extra requirement on the user. Content is not software: where do you put 
people's names on a painting? 

Attribution may be important in Content in a way that it isn't in software 
because there is no "source" to mark as open*. Identifying the source (the 
origin) of the content in the actual product may therefore be the best way of 
ensuring that content can continue to be shared.

Howabout content registries? Go to http://www.contentid.org/ and type in the 
name of the piece, or an ISBN and a page number, and get the license and 
contributor details back (all hyperlinked or with details for easy use). You 
can cross-market this with mobile phone services that allow songs to be 
identified, or seach engines that allow web pages or book content (like 
Amazon) to be identified.

- Rob.

* - I appreciate that you can tag electronic media, but this breaks down for 
performance without watermarking technology. And you can easily strip the 
tags .