Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Johannes Ernst <jernst+lists.ibiblio.org AT netmesh.us>]

> Branko Collin said:
> > patents need to be published to constitute prior art.
>
> A patent application is kept as a private exchange
> between the inventor and the patent office.
> If the patent is granted, the patent office makes
> the patent public.

I believe this statement is out of date, at least for the US. My 
understanding is that USPTO now publishes all applications 18 months 
after they have been filed (and few if any will have been granted or 
rejected by that time).

http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html
(see right-hand column)

Also, I believe that in the US, you may still file a patent up to 12 
months after the initial publication date, unlike in many/most/any? 
other countries.

--
But regardless what the particular goal of a particular individual is 
having created new works, at a minimum, CC should define clearly where 
the line is between "within scope and covered by CC licenses" and "out 
of scope, you are on your own".

Further, one of the big appeals of CC licenses is the "point and 
click", "chinese menu" of licensing options. That standardization into 
a series of boolean choices is great because it takes the cost of 
custom license creation out of the equation, and thus enables a range 
of licenses to be used very quickly by anybody.

I guess I'm asking for the "patent option" and the "trademark" option 
as an additional section in the chinese menu ...