Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Matt Scheuerman <mordecaidesign AT gmail.com>]

So from this qualified group of lawyers and license afficiandos, is
there a pretty clear suggestion for my options?




On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:43:19 -0400 (EDT), Greg London
<email AT greglondon.com> wrote:
> 
> Evan Prodromou said:
> > On Thu, 2004-28-10 at 15:41 -0400, Greg London wrote:
> >
> >> I think attribution should be viewed by its original name of "advertising
> >> clause". If you're using CC-BY for something, it should be for free
> >> advertising, not for any sort of gift-economy type project.
> >
> >
> > That's a complete and utter crock. The Attribution license element was
> > never called the "advertising clause".
> 
> You are correct. It was never called that. My bad on that part.
> 
> I still believe that it is not condusive to a gift-economy license, though,
> which was the main point of my original message.
> 
> A gift is given freely and has no strings that attach it to the giver.
> Cumulative advertising clauses or cumulative attributions could weigh down
> on a gift-economy project enough to kill it.
> 
> I am not against attribution. I use it myself.
> I just think that a gift economy project like wikipedia or similar
> would commit suicide if it had Attribution requirements on its 
> contributions.
> 
> But every author can use whatever license they want.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
>